Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2016/04/27

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

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

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Archive
Archive April 27th, 2016
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Clearly, the uploader isn't the author of someone else's signature. Commons:When to use the PD-signature tag has no information on whether or not signatures are eligible for copyright protection in Armenia, so we have to assume that they are. LX (talk, contribs) 06:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, by User:Green Giant with reason "Clearly, the uploader isn't the author of someone else's signature. Commons:When to use the PD-signature tag has no information on whether or not signatures are eligible for copyright ...". Taivo (talk) 09:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of Krit.phuritheves

[edit]

Here are last remaining contributions of Krit.phuritheves (talk · contribs):

OTRS-permission from T-shirt designer is needed. Taivo. 07:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)


Deleted: speedy deleted. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of Krit.phuritheves

[edit]

Here are last remaining contributions of Krit.phuritheves (talk · contribs):

Small photos without metadata. I suspect not own work, but copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 10:01, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:15, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

typo, should be category not a page PlanespotterA320 (talk) 13:34, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: housekeeping. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:49, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyvio - croppped version of image at http://www.imdb.com/media/rm862890240/nm2240418 stating Photo by Erich Saide Arjayay (talk) 16:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: speedy deleted. Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:50, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyvio - Picture clearly states "John E Reed Hollywood", uploader states "Photo from private collection of Tempest Storm" and than claims it as "own work" which it clearly isn't Arjayay (talk) 16:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: speedy deleted. Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Files_by_User:JSDX_from_fr.wikipedia#mediaviewer/File:Logojsdx.png 93.15.243.242 19:31, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Speedy-closed as being without valid rationale. -- Túrelio (talk) 19:43, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Essendone il proprietario ne chiedo la cancellazione grazie Alematrox (talk) 12:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:38, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

https://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EC%B1%84%EC%9D%80%EC%A0%95

this is me. im chae eun jung (real name is Lee eun jung i hate this photo here. please delete it

Enjel8238 (talk) 14:04, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: nominate the picture, not the policy page. --Jcb (talk) 22:15, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Its a disturbing image which holds back all my work and private life. Melissa sneekes (talk) 22:40, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion, page is not an image. --Rodhullandemu (talk) 22:59, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Hybrid_image_decomposition.jpg 2601:42:702:2B5B:516F:7ED9:57D2:1CC2 20:21, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Rodhullandemu (talk) 20:25, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

cessation d'activité Sauvageot (talk) 13:23, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's a proposal/draft, which doesn't necessarily require "activity", but still has value per the ideas/rules drafted by its editors. Where is the need to delete it? --Túrelio (talk) 13:47, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 17:22, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Uploaded incorrect file/video and this is not my own work- ie. copyright violation Stuart Anthony Halpin (talk) 11:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: kept this page, but deleted File:Educational video of interracial oral sex.webm (this user's only upload), as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 11:30, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

{{Delete |reason= unfree image [https://www.flickr.com/photos/thematthewslack/9117055030] |subpage=File:Prince Beatrice with Dave Clark.jpg |day=27 |month=April |year=2016 }}

Image is all rights reserved (https://www.flickr.com/photos/thematthewslack/9117055030). LavaBaron (talk) 02:57, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what it said on 26 July 2013, when the FlickreviewR robot reviewed it and confirmed it to be licensed under the terms of the cc-by-2.0. Surtsicna (talk) 03:03, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The link points to the lightbox. This is a bug with the bot; you can get it to read a false positive by redirecting it to the lightbox instead of the image's main page. Otherwise you would have linked it it to the image's main page with licensing notice (as is customary) instead of the lightbox as you did. LavaBaron (talk) 03:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You can also change the licensing of your images on Flickr at any time - which is exactly what the uploader did. Surtsicna (talk) 03:24, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, he didn't. LavaBaron (talk) 03:27, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, of course we are going to trust you rather than the FlickreviewR robot. After all, it is the robot that has been crusading against the British royal family and (for some reason) me personally on en.wikipedia. Not you. The robot. Surtsicna (talk) 03:32, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you choose to point to the lightbox (diff: [1]) instead of the licensing page so that FlickreviewR couldn't read the license? This isn't about "trust" and it's not about hurling insults. This is demonstrably someone else's work and, when you uploaded it, you demonstrably pointed the link to the wrong place so that FlickreviewR couldn't read the license. Again, I'm sorry you're so upset, but I'm not sure why exactly. The policies are in place to protect the Wiki. Edit - as for "crusading against you", we've only edited on three mainspace articles together in the last three years with an average of 242 days between edits [2]. Please tone down the hyperbole a bit. You can't insult your way to a proper license for this image. Many thanks - LavaBaron (talk) 03:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The FlickreviewR robot obviously could read the license. It did read the license. The FlickreviewR robot confirmed that, on 26 July 2013, the image was licensed under the terms of the cc-by-2.0. Surtsicna (talk) 03:52, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh good lord. LavaBaron (talk) 03:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Who is that? Surtsicna (talk) 03:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting admin - note that this was stamped through by the FlickreviewR bot which was, a few weeks later, permanently disabled due to chronic malfunctioning. (see: [3]). Its results in 2013 should not be assumed to have accurately reflected the license tag at that time, especially since the uploading editor misdirected the permissions link to the Lightbox of the image instead of to the licensing page. If you can sludge through the intense insults heaped on me, this is basically how he was able to generate the false positive from this broken and non-functioning bot. The image is currently marked unfree and was almost certainly unfree in 2013 when it was uploaded. Out of a preponderance of caution, it must be deleted. LavaBaron (talk) 05:31, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Closing admin - note that this user is currently on a campaign against everything related to the British royal family. She or he has created articles that deal with nothing other than their scandals and supposed dumbness. This witch-hunt here is only a part of a much broader picture. I have no idea how she or he believes (or wants you to believe) that I managed to get the bot to recognize the image as being properly licensed. The number of photographs and videos I have uploaded from Flickr has exceeded 100, ranging from lampreys to athletes. I do not upload images on which I merely happen to stumble; I specifically search for properly licensed images using Flickr filters. Thus I absolutely could not have uploaded a non-free file.

Luckily this is not the only image from this photographer and this photostream that I uploaded. The others are File:Pippa Middleton.jpg, File:The Duke of Cambridge.jpg, File:George Percy, Early Percy.jpg, and File:Chelsy Davy.jpg. In none of these cases have I "chosen to point to the lightbox", yet in all of those cases the copyright status was confirmed (for File:Chelsy Davy.jpg it was even confirmed by the user Leoboudv). And of course, all those images are now tagged as non-free on Flickr. As for this whole lightbox sorcery, I also "chose to point to the lightbox" when uploading File:Jake Dalton.png, but the reviewer Leoboudv nevertheless confirmed its copyright status.

I am amazed by the blatancy of LavaBaron's agenda and I cannot bring myself to assume any good faith on his part. Surtsicna (talk) 09:31, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is no conspiracy to get you. There is no campaign against you. As previously noted we've only edited on three mainspace articles together in the last three years with an average of 242 days between edits [4] And, I've created hundreds of articles, only one of them has been about the royal family - if I'm on a "campaign" against them it's a pretty shoddily put together one. You'll be better off focusing on discussing the status of the non-free images you've uploaded rather than firing chaff into the air with personal attacks and - ahem "unusual" - accusations of conspiracies. LavaBaron (talk) 18:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have never said there was a conspiracy against me. I have never claimed that you were after me. Nevertheless you have denied those things three or four times already. That really makes a person wonder - perhaps I really should make such accusations. And why so much manipulation and blatant untruth? You have obviously created at least two articles directly related to the royal family rather than "only one". You have nominated both of them for DYK with yourself credited as creator.
What you are doing here is exactly what you are doing at the Administrator's Noticeboard on en.wikipedia: spewing irrelevant nonsense rather than arguments relevant to the discussion you started. Why don't you focus on coming up with a (supernatural) explanation of the copyright status of File:Jake Dalton.png, File:Pippa Middleton.jpg, File:The Duke of Cambridge.jpg, File:George Percy, Early Percy.jpg and File:Chelsy Davy.jpg? Surtsicna (talk) 18:49, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Image was sent to speedy, it was located at https://www.flickr.com/photos/thematthewslack/9117055030 marked (c) all rights reserved. COM:PRP. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Zackkaraz26 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused chart of questionable notability. Should be in MediaWiki graph or SVG if useful.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:28, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Files are malicious. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:07, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wrong licence or wrong author; can be found on many sites; as examples: http://www.uznayvse.ru/gallery/lyudmila-sokolova-foto-4.html http://www.vokrug.tv/person/show/lyudmila_sokolova/ Lacrymocéphale (talk) 09:36, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Speedy, per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 09:13, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

copyvio from http://www.wrestlestars.com/wrestler-jeff-hardy/ EricEnfermero (talk) 03:17, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, I'll delete all his uploads as copyright violations: small photos without metadata, found on external sites. Taivo (talk) 15:30, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

copyvio from 2014 article at http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/report-naman-ojha-in-top-form-down-under-2002432 EricEnfermero (talk) 03:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, I'll delete all his uploads as copyright violations: small photos without metadata, found on external sites. Taivo (talk) 15:31, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

falsches Logo DieBauforscher (talk) 20:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 18:25, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate file. A higher resolution version of the same image has been uploaded as File:JNR455(JR East) Banetsu West Line Akabe at Koriyama 2006 1224size.jpg by the original author. DAJF (talk) 04:03, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 21:11, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate file. A higher resolution version of the same image has been uploaded as File:JNR455(JR East) at Koriyama 2006 1200size.jpg by the original author. DAJF (talk) 04:11, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 21:12, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent (100x133 px) resolution, missing EXIF. May be also out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 05:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, text on photo is too small to be readable. And even if bigger version is uploaded, that's probably out of scope. Taivo (talk) 21:18, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Very poor detail. It not possible to read it. Jmarchn (talk) 05:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, I'll delete also file:Embudo para ffaena.jpg: very small size, bigger and older versions are found in internet. Taivo (talk) 21:23, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: Self-created artwork without obvious educational use. HyperGaruda (talk) 06:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 21:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Ccbvcmg (talk · contribs)

[edit]

No evidence of release under CC license. Copyright statement linked from 2 images says non-commercial use only, which is incompatible with Commons.

--ghouston (talk) 08:34, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, license review: NC-ND license on source site. Taivo (talk) 07:21, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright © Univerzitet Sinergija Bijeljina http://www.sinergija.edu.ba/ Lacrymocéphale (talk) 10:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, this is simple logo. Only 12 stars, ring and 3 triangles plus text. But I delete the file nevertheless as almost-copy of file:Univerzitet Sinergija Bijeljina.png. Taivo (talk) 08:39, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted magazine covers Rodrigolopes (talk) 10:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, I'll close that speedily. It's impossible to collect permission from all the magazines. Taivo (talk) 08:41, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope, promotional content Rodrigolopes (talk) 10:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, the logo surpasses threshold of originality. This is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 08:45, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo used in social networks but not in Wikimedia projects. The Commons cannot be a repository for EVERYTHING. It's out of scope and has no place on our servers. Ldorfman (talk) 10:24, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, small unused personal photo without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 08:54, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Uploaded in error. 1mysteryfinn (talk) 10:35, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading week. Taivo (talk) 08:56, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

uploaded in error 1mysteryfinn (talk) 10:36, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading week. Taivo (talk) 08:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

uploaded in error 1mysteryfinn (talk) 10:36, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 08:58, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

uploaded in error 1mysteryfinn (talk) 10:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading week. Taivo (talk) 08:59, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

uploaded in error 1mysteryfinn (talk) 10:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading week. Taivo (talk) 09:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Conversation on Flickr image page between "Aircraft Commons" and the photographer indicates offwiki coordinated meatpuppetry for WMF/ Commons banned user post their block. Ban evasion. Unfitlouie (talk) 01:59, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep as the uploader. The deletion policy never states that uploads by a WMF banned user should be deleted. I am also not a WMF banned user, nor a meatpuppet. This image don't have copyright or scope problems either. -- Poké95 02:11, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Another example of coordinated meatpuppetry on behalf of this WMF banned user.Unfitlouie (talk) 06:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So what? I opened an undeletion request because the deleting admins did not asked the nominator to confirm their identity via OTRS. Are you targeting me or Russavia now? Poké95 06:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Irrelevant. The previous DR was for files uploaded before the ban/block. This is a very recent upload of a file which were never uploaded here. If you operate in a coordinated way with a WMF banned user to upload material on his behalf, you may be equally liable. Unfitlouie (talk) 02:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Since the copyright holder is not the banned user, assisting the banned user does not apply. Shameful. --Amitie 10g (talk) 02:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is that the uploader (a User per the ToU) is assisting a banned user. Unfitlouie (talk) 02:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I have been contacted before by Scott via IRC to upload that file after he asked the photographer of the file to release it under CC-BY-SA-2.0. Happy now? But answer me, what is the point of deleting a file that "assist" a banned user? Does it prevent the banned user from editing Wikimedia sites? Does it kills the banned user (so they cannot edit anymore)? Does it help with Commons' mission? The answer of all those questions is no. If these files will just be deleted because they are "assisting" a banned user, it will just damage Commons, not help. Think about it. You're not a WMF employee to enforce ToU. And even you are a WMF employee, I will still not accept these valuable files to be deleted because they violate ToU. I dare you to get a job on WMF, if you will continue to nominate similar files for deletion. Poké95 05:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Although I thank you for your keep vote, making DRs are mostly constructive, actually. You don't need to upload files to contribute at Commons. Poké95 02:40, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment The issue is not with the file or the author. It is about uniform enforcement of clauses 10 and 12 of WMF's ToU. Unfitlouie (talk) 05:57, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Then it is an issue with the uploader, right? But for a deletion request to happen, there should be an issue with the file (like copyright, scope, etc). But this case is not. We commonly ignore issues with the uploader in DRs. We just focus on the file. So what exactly do you want to solve here? It looks like to me as a "solution looking for a problem". Poké95 06:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Question: Are you an unpaid Commons voluntee, or a paid WMF employee? With your too few editions (most of them unconstructive), I don't think so.
You know too much about the ToU (the Community already accepted it, but not the abuses that it allows, like the unilateral ban of Russavia or the desysop of Denniss), but I think that you're just ignoring the Policies that the Community wrote and accepted, or you're just trolling. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Stick to the facts please. The uploader has already admitted the essential ingredients, ie. A) Russavia (then and still a WMF banned user) arranged for the CC-BY-SA-2.0 copyright licence for this image off-wiki, B) Russavia and uploader communicated via 3rd party IRC and file was then uploaded to Commons per Russavia's request. Now let us leave this up to an unpaid Commons admin volunteer to sort this file out, alternatively we can drag ourselves to WMF to sort out the Job of technical issues inheRent in banning which Poke has so eloquently expressed. Unfitlouie (talk) 18:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Counter  Question for you : Was the photographer made aware that Scott is globally banned at WMF/Commons and if not does this vitiate/void his licence ? Unfitlouie (talk) 18:28, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Does this matter? Why the copyright holder should care of it? We didn't decided the ban of Russavia, but we can decide your block (as the community at the English Wikipedia decided your block). So plase stop trolling, or I'll report you to the AN, since you didn't made any constructive contributions to Commons. --Amitie 10g (talk) 20:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Unfitlouie: Stick to the file please. You still didn't answered my question. Does deleting this file prevents the banned user from editing anymore? Does deleting this file help Commons' mission? Please stop asking if you cannot answer questions. Are you afraid answering my question, or you cannot just answer a simple question? (reference: Star Trek, note that I edit it a bit since the original has personal attacks) I think this DR says there is an issue with the uploader, not with the file. But for a DR to happen, there must be an issue with the file (copyright, scope, etc). Poké95 01:11, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I ask you to withdraw this nomination, since you're wasting our time in a nonsense DR. Poké95 01:12, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Unfitlouie: What are you looking to get out of this? We can waste hours nominating aviation files for deletion that Scott uploaded or had uploaded, there is that many of them. Go right ahead, you're only hurting the community and requesting quality images be deleted. Scott is not a Commons banned user, he is a WMF banned user. If you wish for these files to be deleted on those grounds, please contact WMF. Riley Huntley (talk) 03:09, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't conflate issues, I am not interested in the deletion of Russavia's old files uploaded before his ban. I have nominated this specific file for deletion for reasons of ToU violation. Being a ToU contravention it causes legal problems for prospective reusers. Actually, all edits / files uploaded by a banned user (post ban) can be straightway deleted on sight by any user to safeguard the projects and maintain system stability, and that is not vandalism. Thanks for advising that I contact WMF, but that would make it a user issue naming the uploader and not a file issue. Unfitlouie (talk) 05:17, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, all edits / files uploaded by a banned user (post ban) can be straightway deleted on sight by any user to safeguard the projects and maintain system stability, and that is not vandalism. Really? So how if a banned user tagged a file as copyvio (post-ban), which is really a copyvio? Then we will revert it blindly? That actually damages our project. I know that other, not banned users can tag copyvios instead, but if a banned user cares for our project and tag copyvios as copyvios, then why revert it? ToU? What causes a bigger legal problem, not reverting a banned user's post ban good contributions, or blindly reverting good contributions, including tagging files as copyvios? And why are you not answering my question? Are you afraid? Just go away from Russavia if you cannot defend yourself. We are forcing ourselves forget about the Russavia drama, but there are still other users that wants to restore the drama (not peace!). Poké95 05:27, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep I don't see how the WMF ToU applies to conversations on Flickr. The uploader here is an editor in good standing, and the file is available under a free license. If Scott were to convince a Flickr uploader to release several hundred or even thousand files under a cc-by-sa-2.0 license, are we saying that those files suddenly become tainted and can't be uploaded by anybody, that the Flickr uploader is persona non grata, or that uploaders like Pokéfan95 are in for a San Fran ban? I don't recall James or Kalli (WMF) going quite that far, and I don't see them pushing the delete buttons that're included in their tool sets either, even on uploads done by locked Russavia socks. INeverCry 06:28, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: No consensus to delete. If there are concerns regarding Pokefan and a violation of the TOU, not something we should handle and irrelevant when it comes to the copyright aspect. --Natuur12 (talk) 09:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Same problem as Commons:Deletion requests/File:Montauban82.png Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:35, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, I'll delete all his uploads speedily. 39 files, including 10 collages, where source files are not shown, and 2 logos, which surpass threshold of originality. Other files are small photos and mostly without metadata. Only 2 photos have (different) camera data. Taivo (talk) 09:19, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Violation of copyright Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:38, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, I'll delete all his uploads speedily. 39 files, including 10 collages, where source files are not shown, and 2 logos, which surpass threshold of originality. Other files are small photos and mostly without metadata. Only 2 photos have (different) camera data. Taivo (talk) 09:24, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of focus, unidentifiable Mhohner (talk) 10:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, quality problems. Taivo (talk) 09:51, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of focus, unidentifiable Mhohner (talk) 10:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, quality problems. Taivo (talk) 09:52, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of focus, unidentifiable Mhohner (talk) 10:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, quality problems. Taivo (talk) 09:53, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

no EXIF info, unlikely to be "own work". Uploader has otherwise no contribution.--Liji (talk) 10:52, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, small photo without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 10:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

no EXIF info, unlikely to be "own work". Uploader has otherwise no contribution.--Liji (talk) 10:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, I'll delete also file:羅能華.jpg and file:鄭人碩-第17屆台北電影獎最佳男主角.jpg due to same reason. These are the uploader's only contributions. Taivo (talk) 10:37, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

no EXIF info, unlikely to be "own work". Uploader has otherwise no contribution.--Liji (talk) 11:07, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Mj1021 (talk · contribs) has uploaded two more files, which have (different) EXIF data, but do not show up with Google image search, so I do not delete them. Taivo (talk) 10:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

no EXIF info, unlikely to be "own work". Uploader has otherwise no contribution.--Liji (talk) 11:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Axec (talk · contribs) has uploaded also file:南港藝術小包廂會場拍攝.jpg, which is big photo with EXIF data and uploader's username with EXIF, so I do not delete that. Taivo (talk) 10:51, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small, unusable private image. Grand-Duc (talk) 11:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, I'll delete all contributions of Wonderwoof (talk · contribs): 4 times uploaded the same logo, which surpass threshold of originality, and 6 photos without metadata, 3 of them about own products, but as company is non-notable, its products are also. Taivo (talk) 11:07, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Incompatible licence: "© 2016 Casualino" https://vipbelote.com/terms.fr.html "Toutes les marques déposées, logos et personnages présents sur les sites ou applications mobiles sont soit la propriété exclisive de Casualion JSC ou utilisés avec l'autorisation explicite du propriétaire. Toute action en violation aux droits de propriété intellectuelle liés à ces marques est interdite. En plus, il est expréssement stipulé que la mise à disposition des pages/applications mobiles de Casualino JSC ne comprend aucune autorisation ou toute autre forme de licence d'utiliser, ou reproduire une partie quelconque du contenu." Lacrymocéphale (talk) 12:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See https://vipbelote.com/terms.en.html "§ IV. Page content" for translation. --Lacrymocéphale (talk) 12:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 14:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Incompatible licence: "© 2016 Casualino" https://belot.bg/terms.bg.html https://belot.bg/terms.en.html Lacrymocéphale (talk) 12:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 14:16, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

http://www.bigscreenhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Madonna-Sebastian-King-Liar-Premam-Malayalam-Actress-Latest-Hot-Photos-2016.jpg Lacrymocéphale (talk) 12:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Low definition duplicate of File:Madonna-Sebastian-King-Liar.jpg --Lacrymocéphale (talk) 12:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted, speedily deleted as scaled-down duplicate, but the bigger file is probably also copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 14:20, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low def duplicate of File:Anu-emmanuel-03-1454494024.jpg; wrong author and/or licence (see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Anu-emmanuel-03-1454494024.jpg) Lacrymocéphale (talk) 12:43, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, speedily deleted as scaled-down duplicate, but the bigger file is probably also copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 14:23, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Derivative works.

XXN, 14:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, these posters consist a lot of logos. Most of these logos are copyrighted. Taivo (talk) 14:33, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

I didn't make this photo public. It shouldn't be able to be googled Ajt1094 (talk) 00:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: in all cases countains a 2D work not De Minimis. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:04, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

COPYVIO. Low quality and scanned from somewhere, unlikely to be own work. Unfitlouie (talk) 01:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, to look the metadata is was indeed scanned, so it's unlikely an ownwork. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:06, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by João Vitor Rossi (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used.

Gunnex (talk) 20:36, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: appear to be personal artworks. Of no obvious educational use. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:20, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

I did not mean to upload this image as a common source image. The organization I work for has rights to the image, but I am not the copyright holder. Thanks Nlekach (talk) 21:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:16, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused private image, no educational value → out of scope. Jahobr (talk) 21:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:15, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Pedritovaivai (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent (Facebook) resolutions, missing EXIF. See also [5].

Gunnex (talk) 21:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:14, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 21:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:13, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Sahanat2016 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be the work of the uploader. All the uploaders other images have been copyright violations from Getty Images and other sources.

Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 21:28, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:12, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

the map is likely to be non-free, no evidence of free-licensing 81.23.118.208 21:34, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete Probably unfree, non-photographic content uploaded as a JPG. That the legend and notations in the corner are cropped off is not a good sign that this is the uploader's own work. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 23:17, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:10, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 21:43, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:08, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

blatantly out of scope as a minuscule unused personal image. Grand-Duc (talk) 21:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Not realistically useful for any educational purpose. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:07, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photograph of a scultpure. Copyright for the sculpture is likely owned by Madame Tussauds and/or the Winehouse estate. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 22:02, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Withdrawn I didn't notice that this was in a Flickr album of pictures of London, in which case I believe that the UK's freedom of panorama applies (since it applies to sculptures in premises open to the public). --Ahecht (TALK
    PAGE
    ) 22:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: withdrawn. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:07, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Delete uploader claims this image as own work but it is attributed in the metadata as "All rights reserved" to Jiro Schneider as it also is on the Warner Brothers Records website here and several other websites. We need an OTRS verification to keep this image as it is most unlikely the work of the uploader. Ww2censor (talk) 22:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 04:55, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Delete the uploader claims this as their own work but several copies are found online including a slightly differently cropped version on the band's own website at http://www.thesheltersmusic.com/about We really require an OTRS verification to keep this image. Ww2censor (talk) 22:24, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 04:55, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Delete the uploader claims this as their own work but both tineye and Google images finds loads of this image in different cropped versions just like the band's own website http://www.thewildfeathers.com/photos/122683240664052979127114035-23076. We really require an OTRS verification to keep this image. Ww2censor (talk) 22:29, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 04:55, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Redirect not in use. abbedabbtalk 22:32, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:01, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Redirect page not in use abbedabbtalk 22:35, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:01, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP in Italy Elisfkc (talk) 22:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: There is no single construction which is sufficiently prominent to represent any sort of copyright infringement. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 05:06, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyvio. https://sites.google.com/site/markmorrisswimming/ John from Idegon (talk) 04:23, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: complex logo. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:06, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Neto Portela (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used. If IN scope needs permission via https://www.facebook.com/655062054628008/photos/a.662181620582718.1073741825.655062054628008/662181630582717/?type=3&theater (2015).

Gunnex (talk) 05:11, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:05, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope - unused personal image --ghouston (talk) 06:15, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:05, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No freedom of panorama for sculprures in Norway. Artist is no:Ola Stavseng (b. 1949). 4ing (talk) 06:59, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:12, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No freedom of panorama for sculprures in Norway. Artist is no:Ola Stavseng (b. 1949). 4ing (talk) 07:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:12, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No freedom of panorama for sculprures in Norway. Artist is no:Kari Rolfsen (b. 1938). 4ing (talk) 07:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:13, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Logo d'une marque Lloyd (talk) 07:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete This is not a simple logo. OTRS-permission is needed. Taivo (talk) 21:35, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: deleted by Jcb. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:14, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of Nandofer18

[edit]

Nandofer18 (talk · contribs) uploaded these logos:

Only simple logos can be in Commons without OTRS-permission. Taivo (talk) 07:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete All above the TOO. - Fma12 (talk) 09:27, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:16, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of Thadowens

[edit]

Thadowens (talk · contribs) uploaded these files:

Only simple logos can be in Commons without OTRS-permission. Taivo (talk) 07:15, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:17, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of Radio-Unlimited

[edit]

Here are all contributions of Radio-Unlimited (talk · contribs):

Only simple logos can be in Commons without OTRS-permission. Taivo (talk) 07:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:18, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Nikmon STPM

[edit]

Nikmon STPM (talk · contribs) uploaded these files:

Unused photos about non-notable people. Google translation of file descriptions lets me think, that the photos have nothing to do with descriptions. Out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 07:23, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:19, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

COPYVIO: Entire websiite is copyrighted asserted. The (generic ?) OTRS permission is subject to the photo being taken by Bollywood Hungama photographer. Photographer / Author unknown and no author in EXIF. Unfitlouie (talk) 01:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Christian Ferrer I have spent a good amount of time rereading through the OTRS ticket in entirety. I have stricken my delete vote because I was operating under the specifics in the ticket that stated that each individual file from Bollywood Hungama must go through the OTRS process and be confirmed. Instead, it seems Template:Cc-by-3.0-BollywoodHungama is being used and the OTRS confirmation is being replaced with confirmation from image reviewers. While this is swaying away from what the ticket states, confirmation through OTRS was a request by the OTRS agent and not the copyright holder. This file therefore looks safe to  Keep. Riley Huntley (talk) 06:22, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: This retouched crop out of this source photograph appears to be covered by the very generic grant connected with ticket:2008030310010794. File:Maneka Gandhi.jpg is from the Bollywood Hungama website, carries a watermark refering to that site and is from the Bollywood event “Trailer launch of 'It's Entertainment'”. The photographer is unfortunately not named but I haven't seen yet any eligible photo from that site where the photographer is named. Such generic grants are naturally not without risks. This ticket is from 2008 and there was no contact with the copyright holder since then. Fortunately, the director of the site (who is named at [6]) is still at that position and hence it is likely that we still have the understanding from 2008. --AFBorchert (talk) 20:43, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file's parent image is not created by exclusive photographer of Bollywoodhungama.com. Many other copies (better quality without bollywoodhungama watermark) are in internet. eg. http://www.indicine.com/movies/bollywood/maneka-gandhi-launches-the-trailer-of-its-entertainment-pics/ and http://sharestills.com/image.php?category=3&subcategory=1&gallery=0&photoevent=Maneka%20Gandhi%20Launches%20Trailer%20Of%20Akshay%20Kumars%20Film%20Its%20Entertainment&imagecount=17&totalimages=27&basename=Its%20Entertainment Sigmabaroda (talk) 06:05, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Kept, socks must go back to the drawer. Taivo (talk) 09:14, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Sculpture in the US does not enjoy freedom of panorama. Laws exist to protect copyrighted sculpture art, so the artist can control the images of the art. Binksternet (talk) 01:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: This sculpture was created by Lark Grey Dimond-Cates of Rancho Santa Fe, Audrey Geisel’s daughter and unveiled by Audrey Geisel, widow of Theodor Seuss Geisel, on March 2, 2004. It is the second casting, the first is in Geisel’s birthplace, Springfield, Mass. To keep this photograph we would need the permission of Lark Grey Dimond-Cates. --AFBorchert (talk) 21:17, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused low-quality selfie of non-notable individual. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Unused, out of COM:SCOPE. --AFBorchert (talk) 21:23, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by MRT1977 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Generally per COM:PENIS. We don't need 6 different middling-quality images of this same person's penis.

—/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 02:43, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete all. Low quality penis. Taivo (talk) 13:50, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Per COM:PENIS. --AFBorchert (talk) 21:25, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Generally COM:PENIS. Exceptionally low-quality webcam video of masturbation and ejaculation that got converted into an enormous animated gif. This would be absolutely useless on any project page since it would preload the entire thing. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 02:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Per COM:PENIS. --AFBorchert (talk) 21:26, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused selfie of non-notable individual. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:50, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to note that the image also has no source or license information, and has now been tagged accordingly. --DAJF (talk) 11:34, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Unused, unlicensed, out of scope. --AFBorchert (talk) 21:27, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Jcb: Missing license as of 26 April 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Jcb: Missing license as of 26 April 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.

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

Files uploaded by Short (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Vanity gallery of his penis with no educational purposes. Out of Project scope.

Amitie 10g (talk) 21:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

+File:My surgery pics 038.JPG (already deleted earlier due to low quality) -- Common Good (talk) 18:57, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak  Keep for File:My pics 004.jpg which seems to have some possible medical illustrative potential. There may be one or two others with illustrative value that I wouldn't object to keeping if they were properly described and categorized. However the set as a whole seems poorly photographed, poorly described, and of little use, so  Delete the bulk. -- Infrogmation (talk) 15:47, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted a bunch of them. Kept the rest. Subincision, hypospadias and CBT are in scope. However some of these images were poorly photographed (blurry, not centered) or near dupes. -- Common Good (talk) 18:57, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Short (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:PENIS but with a twist. Most of these were previously nommed and kept on the grounds that some of them have educational value. I argue that this isn't true on the following grounds: The uploader claims that all these are own works, and from that follows that they are all self pics. These are all, or almost all, pics claiming to be depictions of hypospadias or a penile subincision. These are, honestly, mutually exclusive conditions: A person with a penile subincision has something resembling a hypospadias, though its formation is completely different. The same works in reverse. Because this uploader has labeled his images as both, we don't really know how to categorize these images. As such, there is no realistic educational use, because someone trying to make an educational use out of them will be getting deceived: Either this man has a hypospadias or he has a penile subincision. Even in the tremendously unlikely circumstance that he was born with a hypospadias that he had extended (slightly) by a penile subincision, these images are therefore useless as depictions of hypospadias, and questionable for depictions of a penile subincision.

—/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 03:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Indeed, the uploader seems to be confused in regard to the terms. Take, for example, File:Subincision142.JPG which refers to subincision in its file name but where at the same time the description refers to hypospadias. It was sorted into the category Category:Body modification by the uploader which would be fitting for subincision but not a hypospadias. In addition, these photographs are of low quality. Some of them are horribly blurred (like File:My pics 0031.JPG), none of them displays the phenomenon well much unlike the photographs that are used in the respective articles. None of them are used anywhere. Hence, I have deleted the whole lot as nominated per COM:SCOPE and COM:PENIS in particular. --AFBorchert (talk) 21:52, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]


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

Image is not their own work; image is work of Drake and his record label, OVO Music. 128.172.245.5 04:17, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: As nominated as copyvio. --AFBorchert (talk) 21:58, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

false "own work" attribution of illegal copy from original authors copyrighted site [7] with the original quality image [8] Bogomolov.PL (talk) 06:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Indeed, this has been published before elsewhere and needs a permission of its copyright holder. --AFBorchert (talk) 22:15, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Delete Out of scope file. Riley Huntley (talk) 07:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Unused personal photo, out of COM:SCOPE. --AFBorchert (talk) 22:21, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of Claitonmedina

[edit]

Claitonmedina (talk · contribs) uploaded these files:

Historical photos, not own work. Correct author and his/her death year must be given to determine copyright status. Taivo (talk) 07:11, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: These uploads were uploaded when the uploader tried to find and organize a couple of old photographs of Novo Hamburgo. There exist even three tickets from that time (ticket:2011040510022921, ticket:2011040510023358, and ticket:2011070910005098) but none of them was successful in obtaining a permission. The two photographs listed in this DR are, however, not named by any of the three tickets. Given the context and the age of the photographs, it appears highly unlikely that these photographs are the own work by the uploader. --AFBorchert (talk) 23:19, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Jcb: Missing license as of 27 April 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.

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

Files uploaded by S. Steenstra

[edit]

Here are last remaining contributions of S.steenstra (talk · contribs):

Authors are Alex and Tatjana Roosdorp, who are dead less than 70 years (Alex died in 1965, Tatjana 2015). I suspect their copyright violation. OTRS-permission from their heir is needed. Taivo (talk) 07:28, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: These photographs are apparently from a personal archive, “archief J. T. Moll” was given as source for all three pictures. The names given in the author field, “Alex Roosdorp, Tatjana Roosdorp”, are depicted in the photographs. File:Alex en Marietje.jpg depicts according to its description Marie en Alex Roosdorp, File:Alex met camera.jpg depicts Alex Roosdorp, and File:Tatjana en Jos.jpg depicts Jos Moll and Tat Roosdorp. These pictures were used for the article about Marofilm a Dutch film company run by Alex and Marie Roosdorp that produced documentaries. All this appears genuine. Nonetheless, works like these need to be processed through our support team. Unfortunately, I was not able to find a ticket associated with this case. Hence, we have to delete these photographs for now. However, they can be restored as soon as the support team is contacted and the copyright status of these photographs is clarified. --AFBorchert (talk) 14:54, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of Iceberg9999

[edit]

Iceberg9999 (talk · contribs) uploaded these files:

There is no freedom of panorama in Canada for text. Taivo (talk) 07:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is my own pictures for the historic way of Quebec City Coliseum it's not about Canada, it's about Quebec City area. If you don't like it and you want delete, i don't care because it's you own idea but you don't know Quebec city and the Coliseum, so why you want to delete something about pictures about an historic building ? --Iceberg9999 (talk) 18:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


File:Plaque commémorative - 25 ans - Tournoi international de hockey pee-wee de Québec.JPG and File:Plaque commémorative à l'inauguration du Colisée de Québec - 1950.JPG are reliefs that fall under the exception of works of artistic craftsmanship. We can keep them accordingly. However, File:Plaque hommage à Alex Légaré.JPG is a simple two-dimensional sign that is not covered by the freedom of panorama. Hence, it has to be deleted. @Iceberg9999: : you must be careful when you upload photographs of copyrighted works. All these plaques are eligible for copyright. Sometimes, there exist an exception, allowing you to publish it. This is called freedom of panorama. But then you must be sure that the legal requirements for this exception are met. --AFBorchert (talk) 15:10, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. it's ok. you can delete--Iceberg9999 (talk) 20:26, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Naroze ghani

[edit]

Naroze ghani (talk · contribs) has done nothing in wikipedia, except unlinked sandbox in en.wiki and uploading some personal photos, which are used nowhere, except on the sandbox. All his activity in Wikipedia is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 07:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Indeed, a failed attempt of self-promotion. All photographs named are unused and out of COM:SCOPE. There is no indication that the depicted person appears to be notable. --AFBorchert (talk) 15:41, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused advertisment of company of questionable notability. No evidence of permission(s). EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:38, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Appears to be a recreation of the file deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Perfect Vodka Press Release.pdf. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 18:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: recreation of content previously deleted per consensus. --Yasu (talk) 15:26, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

non-free image as also is written on source Yger (talk) 16:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, it's under Attribution 3.0 Unported (CC BY 3.0) and already checked by a reviewer. Kaiketsu (talk) 19:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: source says it's CC BY 3.0. --Yasu (talk) 15:36, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Information of the photographer is not provided. Thus, the publication of this picture does not conform with the cc-by-SA license. Stigfinnare (talk) 13:23, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 16:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Author request Mazta (talk) 19:36, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: uploaded in 2012 and in use. --Yasu (talk) 15:40, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Author request Mazta (talk) 19:36, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: uploaded in 2012 and in use. --Yasu (talk) 15:42, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Author request Mazta (talk) 19:38, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: uploaded in 2012 and in use. --Yasu (talk) 15:42, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Author Request Mazta (talk) 10:25, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --PumpkinSky talk 13:51, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Snapworks

[edit]

Snapworx (talk · contribs) uploaded these photos:

Mostly small photos and mostly without metadata. I suspect not own work, but copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 07:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Indeed, File:MRSGI Metro Pharmacy.jpg appears to related to (but not derived from) this picture as far this kind of analysis is possible for such low resolutions as 90 x 133 pixels. All this is associated with the article en:Metro Retail Stores Group which has a self-promotional touch. Hence, the uploader is possibly related to this company. Nonetheless, such cases need to be processed through our support team and such photographs need to be of higher resolution to be of use. At this size which is far below thumbnail size they are useless and thereby out of COM:SCOPE. Note that some of the photographs were already deleted by other admins. I've not researched them any further. --AFBorchert (talk) 15:55, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of User:Mazta

[edit]

Reasons for deletion request: Author request --Mazta (talk) 19:26, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: files have been uploaded in 2012 and are in use. Yasu (talk) 15:54, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Sg7438

[edit]

Sg7438 (talk · contribs) uploaded these photos:

There is no freedom of panorama in Greece and the houses are probably modern. Taivo (talk) 08:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind... No thanks to you ! [[user:Sg7438|Sg7438]] [[Discussion Utilisateur:Sg7438|pour me parler]] (talk) 11:37, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, it is exceedingly improbable that the architects of these buildings have been dead for >70 years. As there is no Freedom of Panorama in Greece, these photos violate the architects' copyrights. --Storkk (talk) 09:30, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of Yoansierra

[edit]

Yoansierra (talk · contribs) uploaded these files:

Small photos without metadata, watermarks. Not own work, but copyright violations. Taivo (talk) 08:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:58, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

"Copyright © 2016 Latiendadirecta.es" Lacrymocéphale (talk) 08:23, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete This is not a simple logo. Letters "Td" are simple, but the blue quadrangle is not. Taivo (talk) 07:16, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:58, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of Ramadosspragash

[edit]

Here are last remaining contributions of Ramadosspragash (talk · contribs):

Small photos and mostly without metadata. If camera data exists, then mostly different. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 08:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:59, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by NopiAbat

[edit]

Here are last remaining contributions of NopiAbat (talk · contribs):

Not own work as claimed. OTRS-permission from author Ndok PINIQI is needed. Taivo (talk) 08:32, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:02, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Does not depict a person of encyclopaedc relevance. Zenwort (talk) 09:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete I added the uploader's other contributions due to same reason. Depicted person is not mentioned in en.wiki. Taivo (talk) 07:59, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:03, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of Jorgitob93

[edit]

Here are last remaining contributions of Jorgitob93 (talk · contribs):

Small photos without metadata. I suspect copyright violation. Posters and logos I deleted speedily. Taivo (talk) 09:24, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:03, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Kidofgod21 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

I find it unlikely these lo res game screenshots are the uploader's own work as claimed.

— Racconish ☎ 09:54, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikeky claim of own work

— Racconish ☎ 10:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:03, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

On Flickr with Public Domain Mark. Since the PDM is simply an expression of opinion and not a license and since it can be changed at any time, it is not acceptable for Commons. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:03, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

no EXIF info, unlikely to be "own work". Uploader has otherwise no contribution.--Liji (talk) 10:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Uploader has other contributions, but the photo is problematic nevertheless. Taivo (talk) 09:59, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:03, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of scope Laber□T 11:36, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:04, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Prakash ilage (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:04, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Peterjames5 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

These seem to be non-free cover art, non-free posters, non-free advertisements or some other kind of non-free content. No evidence of permission.

Stefan2 (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:04, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://i.imgur.com/JrQDuvV.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:43, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:04, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:43, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:04, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:05, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:06, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like https://eljpublications.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/rsz_p1010145.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:54, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:06, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:54, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:06, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:06, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

due to intense fog aircraft is just barely visible PlanespotterA320 (talk) 15:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:09, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-free posters and covers.

XXN, 15:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:09, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal photos.

XXN, 15:23, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:09, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused file, private image BrightRaven (talk) 15:26, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:09, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 17:29, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:10, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No indication of users own work on this black and white scan of what looks to be an historic painting. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:34, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:10, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No source of basemap. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:35, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:10, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Cristinac77 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

This group of images includes book covers, photos of model airplane, first day cover, postage stamps, framed photographs, identity cards, museum exhibits as well as photos from scrap books and photo albums, newspaper clippings, images from approximately 1940s to the present, all labled as own work and quite clearly not own work. Some of these might be able to be kept if accurate source/author data were provided. One is a painting, but again own work.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:13, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Cristinac77 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

The files are derivative works (scans or photos) uploaded under CC-by-sa tag by the owner of the photograph (not the original author thus). I reckon that several (if not all) those files are in fact copyvio. The only doubt is about (real) anonymous EU works that should be correctly tagged.

Ruthven (msg) 13:17, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at a couple of these images, File:National Parks Airways, 1936.jpg also appears on this Flickr page as a 2013 upload, for which the uploader marks it as "Photo by Kent Moser" (who, according to this unrelated photo by the same Flickr user, was an aircraft mechanic for TWA). File:L'areoporto di Pocatello (Idaho, USA) sede della Compagnia Aerea National Parks Airways.png appears on this page, and was present there as early as November 2007 (archive.org link). The same photo, in a less cropped form, can also be seen as the second image on this page from the Ed Coates collection; Ed Coates got the photo from Western Airlines, which he worked for at one time. --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 04:29, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but without further information, we cannot establish whether the photographers have died 70 years ago or are still alive. Even with this information, the files should be deleted for the COM:PRP --Ruthven (msg) 17:23, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I wasn't trying to argue against their deletion; quite the contrary, I was just adding some information on two images which I thought you might find helpful, trying to make clear that they seem to have been misrepresented here by the uploader. (True, I had edited one of those images in the past, but at that time I was taking the uploader at their word. In fact, it was your deletion nomination which led me to research their actual origins.) By all means, feel free to proceed. --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 23:01, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete all: even in case there wasn't a copyright issue, the informative content is too low to suggest further investigation. The potentially useful ones are watermarked or too small, but even in these few cases copyright doubts are too strong. These pictures were probably shot in Italy (some details reveal an Italian home-banking tool on the table), but aren't covered by the Italian law: the photographed pictures were taken in many countries but Italy. --g (talk) 22:01, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 08:47, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No indication of user's own work, image looks halftoned. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:44, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:13, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No confidence that this tiny poor quality image is own work of uploader, it was uploaded in 2016 and claimed to date from 2002. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:13, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Romcha production (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused personal photos of a non-notable man.

XXN, 18:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:13, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 18:59, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:14, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work (satellite image): small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, appears to be some kind of Google Earth derivative. Also previously published via (example) https://www.facebook.com/ecomuseusc/photos/a.341220036078329.1073741827.305122896354710/341219952745004/?type=3&theater (01.2015) Gunnex (talk) 19:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:15, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

http://metallore.org/metal-topic?t=1414 was over a year before the date on this image. [[COM:OTRS[[ permission needed because it was in wide use prior to this upload. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:15, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Auradei2015 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused personal photos - out of scope.

XXN, 19:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:15, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Cci.if.ua (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Non-free logos and derivative works. Also out of scope.

XXN, 19:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:15, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Keshripawan (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Selfies, personal photos are out of COM:SCOPE.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:15, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Juliannajw (talk · contribs)

[edit]

No indication of user's own work on this glam gallery small sizes, low quality, all similar subject, no metadata.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:15, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Zubin88 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:COPYVIOs: No confidence that any of these images is own work of uploader who has had prior DNs and speedies.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:29, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:15, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal photos - out of scope.

XXN, 19:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:15, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Yarayanna1984 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Non-free book covers.

XXN, 19:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:16, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Martinenkoaleks (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused personal pictures - out of scope.

XXN, 19:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:16, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Related ptwiki entry speedy deleted. Gunnex (talk) 20:52, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:16, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, mysterioulsy watermarked + out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 20:54, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:16, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 21:02, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:16, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per COM:PENIS: Unremarkable series of images with description purporting to "analyze" the use of cock rings. Appears to be for promotional purposes—whether of the uploader or of cock rings more generally, I can't tell. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 22:43, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:17, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Promotion poster (Copyright © 2016 Latiendadirecta.es) based on an overused image coming from a picture library http://www.clubrotariosansalvador.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Registro2.jpg http://www.fuilatin.org/images/joomlart/slideshow//sl1-first.png https://0701.static.prezi.com/preview/smjousdz4h6mu7bwh5cqes3epd6jc3sachvcdoaizecfr3dnitcq_0_0.png Lacrymocéphale (talk) 08:21, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, additional SCOPE concerns. --Storkk (talk) 09:45, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of Djzarkin

[edit]

Here are last remaining contributions of Djzarkin (talk · contribs):

They are called selfies, but usually they aren't. Small photos and (with one exception) without camera data. I suspect copyright violation. In addition, depicted person is not mentioned in en.wiki, so the photos are also out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 09:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination: scope and copyright concerns. --Storkk (talk) 09:45, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Ilja j

[edit]

I think that all are copyvio. -Insider (talk) 09:39, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Christian Ferrer deleted three files, which were found on external sites. I'll delete the last file, because there is no freedom of panorama in Russia for sculptures. Taivo (talk) 08:19, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: for the non-FOP related images, the photos were taken by a Nikon D7000 and a Canon EOS... if uploader is the photographer, they should confirm license via COM:OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 09:48, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

File used only for an attack page (now deleted) on English Wikipedia, uploaded by an editor with no other edits. File has no plausible likelihood of constructive use. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 09:49, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Has this photograph really been taken by the uploader (and on the same day as uploaded)? If yes, why is the resolution so small, then? Leyo 14:15, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As already discussed with "Nothingserious", I will provide a higher resolution file of "Peter Dimroth.tif" in due course. Until then, I propose to leave the low resolution image. Best, Hhilbi


Deleted: per nomination: original photographer will be the copyright holder, and they must contact COM:OTRS to confirm the free license. --Storkk (talk) 09:50, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP in Kazakhstan Elisfkc (talk) 19:16, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Uploader is not photographer. OTRS-permission from Magdeev Ramil is needed. Taivo (talk) 17:51, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per Taivo... not a FOP issue. --Storkk (talk) 09:54, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by MV Promotion (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope - commercial auto-promotional upload campaign (unused files).

XXN, 15:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 09:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Getty claim copyrright on this http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/license/174307473 CannibalSnacks (talk) 15:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep. The claim is invalid, because the copyright for this image belongs to Mondadori Publishers; it is expired in the country of origin (Italy). The image is from 1958 and hence is compliant with COM:URAA. Getty has nothing to do with it; they claim copyright on all images they host, even if they are anonymous and more than 100-120 years old. Materialscientist (talk) 21:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per Materialscientist. --Storkk (talk) 09:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Wandersola (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Non-free posters and captures of the Ukrainian film "Такі красиві люди" (Such beautiful people).

XXN, 16:39, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Copyright holders for the film should confirm license via COM:OTRS to have these restored. --Storkk (talk) 09:59, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Name in EXIF copyright statement different to uploader; no evidence of permission; nonsensical description Andy Mabbett (talk) 16:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, "Michaeldb | Dreamstime.com" should confirm license via COM:OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 10:00, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unidentified equations ; no comments ; no cat ; no use ; translation of the description is Leaflets teachers mystery ; out of project scope Tangopaso (talk) 19:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 10:01, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Fake license BelCorvus (talk) 19:29, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyright holder should confirm license via COM:OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 10:02, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Mikatuk Oleh Igorovich (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Non-free/personal creative works; unused and unusable. Out of scope.

XXN, 19:43, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 10:04, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright violation possibly 89.242.141.235 19:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC) Please see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Mohammed_Bin_Salman_Al-Saud_2015BA.jpg 89.242.141.235 19:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by ~riley: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Files of Wikicology

[edit]

Wikicology (talk · contribs) uploaded these photos:

First set

Second set

Third set

Small photos without metadata. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 09:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have added these subtitles, and sorted the list. Files from the third set had EXIF at upload. For all of them, we have:
Exposure time 	0/1 sec (0)
Orientation 	Normal
Horizontal resolution 	72 dpi
Vertical resolution 	72 dpi
Software used 	Rim Exif Version1.00a
Y and C positioning 	Centered
Exif version 	2.2
Meaning of each component :     Y,     Cb,     Cr,     does not exist
Subject distance 	0 meters
Light source 	Unknown
Flash 	Flash did not fire, No flash function
Color space 	sRGB

All these files seem have been taken by the same Blackberry. In some of them the uploader is on the picture, but in a context were he can have gathered the people, provided the Blackberry and ordered someone else to take the picture.

Files from 2nd set are at a greater resolution. Perhaps they were taken by a Blackberry, and cropped. Not sure of nothing.

The first file is special. It should have been taken from a NIKON D3100, the 25 April 2015, at the Beacon of ICT Awards 2015 ceremony. More inquiry is needed. Pldx1 (talk) 09:13, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Marte3.jpg is the same image found on page 2 of this slideshow, published 19 February 2016 and copyrighted 2016.
File:Marte1.jpg is similar to the image in this news article and one of the images on this article, both published 20 February 2016. These images appear to have been taken during this person's visit to University of Sussex; it looks like Marte1.jpg is one in a series. Ca2james (talk) 17:03, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment File:Isa Marte2.jpg, also uploaded by Wikicology, was deleted as a blatant copyright violation. Presumably it fits into the second group. I can't see the deleted image but if an admin could verify it is similar to the second group, that makes those images untrustworthy. BethNaught (talk) 20:17, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The picture on the slideshow is a cropped view of what is shown at Marte3.jpg, and not the contrary. Therefore, things are slightly more complicated. Pldx1 (talk) 12:16, 3 May 2016 (UTC) Being more precise. Both pictures seems to be derived works of a larger 3/2 picture, not of a 16/9 one. Pldx1 (talk) 11:56, 4 May 2016 (UTC) [reply]
Once again, the copyright doesn't belongs to the one who pressed the button when his participation was only to act like a programmed timer, as ordered by the organizer of the picture taking. Therefore File:Olatunde and CFA.jpg (604×453) should have not been deleted on this ground, while the present discussion was running. Moreover, this picture will provide informative material to an academic study about "How Ambassador Wikicology addressed the Nigerian media, especially en:Chukwuemeka Fred Agbata on 20 August 2015 at en:Channels TV". (adding missing signature) Pldx1 (talk) 08:25, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Images deletion request --- Photographers gave me permission to upload some photos for free use, but I did not understand "own work" was more than the uploader and owner of the camera. I understand "own work" means who pushed the button now. I want all these images deleted promptly so that they can be fixed. Wikicology (talk) 09:07, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: As confirmed by the uploader, Wikicology, these photographs require permission from their respective copyright holders sent to our support team. I delete the lot for now but when permissions are forthcoming, they can be restored. --AFBorchert (talk) 11:26, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]


The deletion of the last file failed for technical reasons and I have opened a ticket for this. --AFBorchert (talk) 11:37, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Some hours later, I was able to delete the file. --AFBorchert (talk) 14:25, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

[10] (the source) requires the purchase of a license for commercial use. Licensing problems. Ebe123 (talk) 20:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ebe, the image was created by us for Wikipedia, please feel free to verify this by emailing to info@vectoropenstock.com Aqrva (talk) 7:57, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello Aqrva. To submit the image, could you send a message giving permission to Wikipedia to use the image to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (Presumably under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported). Thanks! (Also, when you do, could you upload the image as a SVG as it's a vector graphic?) Ebe123 (talk) 02:31, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep: Multi-licensed graphic. If you see the source page closer, it mentions clearly that the graphic is licensed under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license; the Commercial license does not require attribution.

Kept: Multi-licensed at least under a valid license (CC-BY-SA-3.0), and permission confirmed. --Amitie 10g (talk) 15:43, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Complex logo with DW background. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:27, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:05, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

The uploader stated on en.wiki that the copyright holder is Syed Mohsin Nawab Rizvi, not own work as he is stating here. Diannaa (talk) 00:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

uploader by mistake stated that the copyright holder is Syed Mohsin Nawab Rizvi he was my late father and i am the owner of the album of my father so i am the copy right holder of this work.


Deleted: . --Krd 17:02, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No indication of user's own work on this politician's portrait. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:02, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 17:11, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Theothermonkey (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Generally per COM:PENIS; these are all images of middling photographic quality (though some were clearly done with a good camera, most are way overprocessed and uploaded in a web resolution) depicting a nude caucasian male in a variety of quasi-artistic poses or marring what would otherwise be a breathtaking landscape shot. Because of these issues, none of these images are useful or unusual as examples of the human penis or of landscape photography. Added to that, looking at the uploader's non-upload contribs, he's tended to add his uploads to category description pages.

—/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 22:30, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 17:33, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Maybe wrong author and/or licence: http://www.primula.co.uk/our-range.html Lacrymocéphale (talk) 15:17, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:44, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

very low resolution (aircraft registration number can't be read), better higher resolution photos of delta airlines aircraft available PlanespotterA320 (talk) 15:17, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:44, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low resolution, aircraft registration number cant' be read, subject of photo (aircraft) is VERY low resolution for wikimedia standards, better photos available PlanespotterA320 (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:43, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Zherebetskij (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope - unused personal photos.

XXN, 16:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:42, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Double upload Afifa Afrin (talk) 16:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:41, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Double upload Afifa Afrin (talk) 16:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:41, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Double upload Afifa Afrin (talk) 16:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:41, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Double upload Afifa Afrin (talk) 16:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:41, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Pig1995z (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Screenshots of some video game. Non-free content.

XXN, 16:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:41, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Maybe wrong author and/or licence: http://www.primula.co.uk/our-range.html Lacrymocéphale (talk) 17:07, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:39, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Maybe wrong author and/or licence: http://www.primula.co.uk/our-range.html Lacrymocéphale (talk) 17:07, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:39, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

self promotion Bazj (talk) 17:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:39, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

imho advertisements for "dubbed movies download", see www.telugupalaka.com, Roland zh (talk) 17:26, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:39, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

single-file upload, imho rather 'posing', file not in use at Wikimedia projects, and doubtful educational usefulness, hence out of scope Wikimedia Commons, Roland zh (talk) 17:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:38, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

chart those data imho may be used as text in a related wiki, but file also not in use at Wikimedia projects, and doubtful educational usefulness, hence out of scope Wikimedia Commons, Roland zh (talk) 17:50, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:38, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

bad quality, too light better File:75 Madonna Crowned by an Angel.jpg and File:Albrecht Dürer - Madonna Crowned by an Angel - WGA7326.jpg Oursana (talk) 18:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:38, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused (and probably unusable) personal photo of a Wikimedian. Out of scope. XXN, 19:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:37, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unidentified castle ; unidentified location ; watermark with websites ; unclear description (translation is Razi School 1783 home known as the castle) ; no use ; no encyclopedic value Tangopaso (talk) 19:26, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:37, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Semi- explicit image with questionable EV value. Subject name is not obviously linked with the uploader's. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:39, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:36, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Explicit image, but the concern here is that it needs the original source, and not another wiki. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:40, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:36, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, glamour pose, Commons is not a webhost, and this image is of questionable EV ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:36, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, glamour pose, Commons is not a webhost, and this image is of questionable EV ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:36, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seemingly unused, glamour/explict pose, Questionable EV. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:44, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:36, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seemingly unused, glamour/explict pose, Questionable EV. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:36, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seemingly unused, glamour/explict pose, Questionable EV. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:36, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Related ptwiki entry speedy deleted. Gunnex (talk) 19:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:35, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seemingly unused, glamour/explict pose, Questionable EV. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:35, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Glamour/explict pose, Questionable EV. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:35, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seemingly unused, glamour/explict pose, Questionable EV. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:35, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Related ptwiki entry speedy deleted. Gunnex (talk) 19:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:35, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seemingly unused, glamour/explict pose, Questionable EV. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:49, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Additonal 10cents images:
File:Jennifer Ann on the carpet - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting (1).jpg
File:Jennifer Ann on the carpet - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting (2).jpg
File:Jennifer Ann on the carpet - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting (3).jpg
File:Jennifer Ann on the carpet - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting.jpg
File:Jennifer Anns whipping Jan 2012 - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting (1).jpg
File:Jennifer Anns whipping Jan 2012 - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting.jpg
File:Jennifer Anns whipping Jan 2012-30 - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting.jpg
File:Jennifer March 2012-1 - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting.jpg
File:Jennifer March 2012-12 - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting.jpg
File:Jennifer March 2012-13 - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting.jpg
File:Jennifer March 2012-15 - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting.jpg
File:Jennifer March 2012-19 - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting.jpg
File:Jennifer March 2012-2 - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting.jpg
File:Jennifer March 2012-21 - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting.jpg
File:Jennifer March 2012-23 - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting.jpg
File:Jennifer March 2012-4 - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting.jpg]
File:Jennifer March 2012-5 - Flickr - Slut Jennifer Ann for reposting.jpg
Same rationale.
ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 19:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:34, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal photo - out of scope. XXN, 19:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

DR started to verify claimed 'own work', as imho potentially non-free content, see format (scan?) and missing EXIF data, Roland zh (talk) 20:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unsued, What educational purpose does this image serve? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete Not realistically useful as an image of binding because of the blurred foreground and inexplicable landscape background, not realistically useful as an image of landscape photography because of the bound legs in the foreground, not realistically useful as an image of uses of a belt because of the bad lighting and low resolution of the portion showing the belt. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 23:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:32, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, Unidentified nude, What educational purpose does this image serve? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:07, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:32, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

DR started to verify claimed 'own work', as imho rather small-sized 'professional-looking' format and missing EXIF data, Roland zh (talk) 20:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:32, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

DR started to verify claimed 'own work', as imho potentially non-free content, as well as maybe 'profiling', see single-file upload, and thumbnail format, Roland zh (talk) 20:35, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:32, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 20:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:32, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be uploader's own work. Kelly (talk) 20:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:32, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

book cover Prométhée (talk) 21:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:31, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

I challenge the educational usefulness due to the following points: there's no meaningful description and the picture looks like having been digitally processed to look pleasant to the eye, but this means that it isn't suited for a documentation of some natural state. And if it comes to photoshopping skills, there is nothing like a protocol from which to learn how to repeat the digital alterations. And it's really small by 2010's and today's standards. Grand-Duc (talk) 21:38, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete Overprocessed, reds are badly blown out, shoddy composition, artifacts, no frame of reference to at least estimate its size. If you crop it down to the fruit, it's really, really low resolution. No indication of what this plant is, so even without those problems this isn't realistically useful. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 23:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:31, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per COM:PENIS; low-resolution, low-quality image marred by poorly placed labels and what appears to be promotional language in the text ("rippled penis skin", "thick foreskin", "thick penis shaft"). Moreover, this image may not be licensed properly: The description purports to contain restrictions on use ("This photo is for educational purposes"). With this many problems, we shouldn't be keeping this image. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 22:40, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:30, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:PENIS: Extraordinarily low quality and blurry, using a wrinkled bedsheet as a backdrop. Evidently intended as an example of a micropenis, but my understanding is that micropenises are 69mm and smaller. Therefore not realistically useful for an educational example of what a micropenis looks like. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 22:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:30, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Nastjaa23 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Non-free book covers.

XXN, 16:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete.Files should be transfered on local space.--Andriy.v (talk)

Files uploaded by Nastjaa23 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Likely all copyvios. All different cameras and mainly without exif data. File:AgnesMartin-Lugand.jpg shows Patrick Fouque as author in Exif. File:Books-Elizabeth-Gilbert.jpg shows Paul Jeffers as author in exif. Book covers are unfree derivatives.

Basvb (talk) 01:24, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete. Here's one of the authors: Joachim Boepple Cheers - --Sir James (talk) 04:46, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Materialscientist (talk) 00:41, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

I think, it is copivio. Photo was published at Demiart (http://demiart.ru/forum/index.php?showtopic=151723&st=3315) in 2012. Access to forum after registration, but photo can be found by Yandex Image Search Engine. Anyway, there is strange widthXheight, if uploader has had original, dimensions would be more real. In metedata author - Picasa, date - 2012. Dmitry89 (talk) 08:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Piazzale Pino Pascali is apparently a place specifically designated by the city for graffiti ([11] and [12] are cited as sources on the category's page) . As such, {{Non-free graffiti}} cannot apply, as graffiti here is not illegal. Instead, copyright-wise, these are likely murals, even if their authors consider themselves graffiti artists. As Italy has no Freedom of Panorama for 2D artwork, and OTRS permission from the artist of each is required. Not sure why these were missed in the previous DR, but am nominating them now.

Storkk (talk) 14:31, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: previous DR is at Commons:Deletion_requests/Category:Graffiti_in_Piazzale_Pino_Pascali. Storkk (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep In my opinion, if a graffiti artist creates graffiti in a space granted by the city, it is as if one donates his work to the city itself, thereby losing its rights copyright. is also aware that if it's a work in a public space, that his work will be photographed, copied, modified ... --Nicholas Gemini (talk) 23:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Nicholas Gemini: I think everybody here has had nasty surprises, copyright-wise (including me). Copyright an extremely complicated and unintuitive topic, and really it very rarely actually works the way we think it should (legally or indeed morally). Some places do indeed operate more-or-less as you discuss: artwork permanently on display loses most copyright protections (e.g. Switzerland). Most places, however, (and Italy in particular) don't operate this way... please read COM:FOP for a good introduction. I think the vast majority of us really wish Freedom of Panorama was more widely recognized (see File:Tower_Bridge_view_at_dawn_FOP.jpg for what could happen if FOP was harmonized more in the Italian direction!). Wishing, however, doesn't make it so, unfortunately. Storkk (talk) 13:43, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      •  Delete It means available commercially that we uploaded the files to Commons. The Copyright Act of many countries does not permit it.--Y.haruo (talk) 03:53, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        • One last thing ... the good part of the file that represent graffiti, do not have the OTRS permission from the artist, like my files, those not controlled them? yet they are there for years ... if you have deleted my files, you must also delete the other, why do not you do it? --Nicholas Gemini (talk) 23:40, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
          • Because the vast majority of graffiti is illegal, please see {{Non-free graffiti}}. Essentially, the argument is that if it's legal, we cannot host it since it probably qualifies for copyright protection... but if it's illegal it might not. As previously mentioned, COM:FOP rules make graffiti in some countries automatically free. Also note that keeping illegal graffiti is not uncontroversial, and that "hey, why aren't you deleting that other stuff" is not a reasonable argument. Best regards, Storkk (talk) 04:34, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
            • Because I'm using the Google translator, I understood very little of the explanation ... but do not worry, I do not want other explanations ... What I am sure of is that on other sites (Panoramio and Flickr for example) you can upload all your photos without problems...With my photos only trying to help the community of Commons, not to create problems. Since I am unable to do so, from now on, I do not charge more of my files on this site ... maybe I'll only other minor contributions ... maybe ... --Nicholas Gemini (talk) 23:45, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
              • Why if I ask "hey, why are not you deleting That other stuff" is not a reasonable argument? I repeat that on Commons There are an infinite number of files that do not respect certain rules, but the ones you do not go you control, you're just doing some bad things about me, you control only what makes you comfortable. You do not deserve respect for that.--Nicholas Gemini (talk) 23:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There are over 31 million files on commons, and ~250 administrators (a few dozen of whom are regularly active), and another few dozen non-admins who regularly nominate files for deletion. Therefore, in practice, the files that get nominated are simply those that are noticed and nominated for deletion. If you notice others, please help by nominating them! But pointing out that we "have neglected to nominate some other file, and therefore you should keep this" is a non sequitur. If you need more information on this topic, it is well fleshed out at: en:WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. I appreciate you probably don't speak Catalan, but ca:Viquipèdia:Com_el_meu,_n'hi_ha_d'altres may give you less google translate trouble, given that it is a Romance language. Storkk (talk) 00:19, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:20, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-free book covers.

XXN, 16:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:09, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

To many use; maybe wrong author or licence. Examples: https://sd48brackendale.org/2016/03/11/bre-friday-communicator-29/ http://www.newwavegymnastics.com/ http://harborbayclub.com/group-exercise/kids-gymnastics/ Lacrymocéphale (talk) 09:39, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete also copy of this file:ImagesS.jpg. Taivo (talk) 08:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 22:15, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 23:36, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wrong author. Wrong licence: "© 2006 - 2016 www.colorstv.com, All rights reserved" Lacrymocéphale (talk) 12:07, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete In my opinion the logo is not simple. Taivo (talk) 11:22, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


This is new Logo of Colors TV, I need to update the same as I'm from Authorised representative company from Colors TV. The changes required as on searching Colors TV logo older logo is showing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chinuarun29 (talk • contribs) 3 mai 2016 à 11:25‎ (UTC)


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:33, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

"© 2014 ALDER CONSULTING. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED." http://alderconsulting.com/ Lacrymocéphale (talk) 09:40, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete This is simple logo (words plus sinusoids), so it is not protected with copyright. But en:Alder does not mention the company, so it is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 08:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: out of scope. --Jcb (talk) 21:37, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

"© 2014 ALDER CONSULTING. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED." http://alderconsulting.com/ Lacrymocéphale (talk) 09:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete This is simple logo (words plus sinusoids), so it is not protected with copyright. But en:Alder does not mention the company, so it is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 08:16, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: out of scope. --Jcb (talk) 21:38, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of project scope, Commons is not a private photo album. Poké95 06:32, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep There exists now en:Shqipe N. Duka. Taivo (talk) 11:16, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per Taivo; in scope proven. Riley Huntley (talk) 01:36, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

The subject doesn't want this particular photo to be on internet Akinaakud (talk) 15:11, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Akinaakud: If you are the subject of the photo, can you send an email please to the OTRS to confirm your identity? We don't make courtesy deletions without confirmed evidence from the subject of a photo. Thanks, Poké95 05:42, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 21:40, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

These is not a photo of Shqipe N. Duka! New photos will be added emediatly after deletion Akinaakud (talk) 19:56, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

this is not a photo of Shqipe N Duka Monarkiafilms (talk) 23:17, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

this is not a photo of Shqipe N. Duka Monarkiafilms (talk) 23:19, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Please {{Rename}} or dispute the attribution in the file page. Ruthven (msg) 12:38, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Deleted: no valid reason for deletion. Please {{Rename}} or dispute the attribution in the file page. Ruthven (msg) 12:39, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: no valid reason for deletion. Please {{Rename}} or dispute the attribution in the file page. Ruthven (msg) 12:39, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

The subject doesn't want this particular photo to be on internet Akinaakud (talk) 15:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 21:40, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is not a photo of Shqipe N. Duka! New photos will be added emediatly after deletion Akinaakud (talk) 19:57, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a photo of Shqipe N. Duka Monarkiafilms (talk) 23:18, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Please {{Rename}} or dispute the attribution in the file page. Ruthven (msg) 12:39, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:28, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Mys_721tx (talk) 00:55, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Probably not a free image Shev123 (talk) 08:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:05, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

This canton no longer exists since 2015-Ce canton n'existe plus depuis 2015. Père Igor (talk) 10:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:05, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Logo under free license Animaloid (talk) 10:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment The logo is ineligible to copyright. The logo is used in ru.wikii, but the article is nominated there for deletion due to non-notability. I cannot suggest: let's wait until DR is closed there, because it can take very long time in ru.wiki. The organization was founded in Czech Republic, but is not mentioned in cz.wiki. Taivo (talk) 10:27, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete Now the article is deleted in ru.wiki. The logo is unused. Taivo (talk) 09:39, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:06, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

small, unusable image as it lacks a sensible description. Grand-Duc (talk) 11:07, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:07, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

samsulhakim bin samsulnizam 124.13.222.15 12:15, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. howcheng {chat} 02:08, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Maybe wrong author and/or licence. Photo of Sai Pallavi. Used many times: http://www.thehindu.com/multimedia/dynamic/02821/sai_2821235e.jpg http://www.madiccreations.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Sai-Pallavi-HD.jpg http://news.indiglamour.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Sai-Pallavi-Actress-Photos-12.jpg etc. Lacrymocéphale (talk) 12:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:08, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Maybe wrong author and/or licence; already published on http://mirchihub.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Anu-Emmanuel-roped-in-for-in-Nanis-next.jpg http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/thumb/51572171.cms?width=158&height=118 Lacrymocéphale (talk) 12:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:09, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wrong author and licence; http://ybeside.com/2015/09/keerthi-suresh-photo-gallery-latest-photos-images/#prettyPhoto[gallery]/2/ http://i0.wp.com/www.korada.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Keerhi-Suresh-HD-Images.jpg etc. Lacrymocéphale (talk) 12:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:09, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

http://www.bigscreenhouse.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Madonna-Sebastian-King-Liar-Premam-Malayalam-Actress-Latest-Hot-Photos-2016.jpg Lacrymocéphale (talk) 12:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:09, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Hal Bregg II (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:27, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let the table be deleted. I will modify the article so that the table comes as wiki-text.


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:10, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:29, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:10, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photo is extremely grainy, many photos of southwest airlines 737's are available PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:31, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:11, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photo is extremely grainy, many photos of southwest airlines 737's are available, poor quality, subject is low resolution PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:32, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:12, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photo is extremely grainy, many far superior photos of southwest airlines 737's are available, poor quality. PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:13, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photo is extremely grainy, many far superior photos of southwest airlines 737's are available, poor quality, aircraft registration number unreadable PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:34, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:13, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photo is extremely grainy, many far superior photos of southwest airlines 737's are available, poor quality, aircraft registration number unreadable due to poor quality PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:34, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:13, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photo is extremely grainy, many far superior photos of southwest airlines 737's are available, poor quality, aircraft registration number unreadable, airplane is blurry (motion not handled well) PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:36, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:14, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photo is VERY grainy, not wikimedia quality at all, other better photos available PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:39, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:14, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:17, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://blogs-images.forbes.com/truebridge/files/2016/03/Geoff_Lewis.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:44, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:20, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/498643755243565056/acUeeoBM.jpeg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I support deletion unless OTRS permission is forthcoming. this version is larger. Diannaa (talk) 15:21, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:21, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like https://flavorwire.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/tumblr_inline_njvxcbehzp1t6xgsn1.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:21, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://graphics.berkeley.edu/people/jStrain.png. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:22, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://web-salon.com.ua/gallery-thumb/546/protected/0000004.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:22, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:23, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://cdn.tabletennista.net/b4a657beb22b6e61d002173c1bbd8dc0/tabletennista.com/up/posts/DimitrijOvtcharovWorldTeamTableTennis8cTk_XuVaOLl.jpg/650x/DimitrijOvtcharovWorldTeamTableTennis8cTk_XuVaOLl.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:50, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:23, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is no freedom of panoram in Russia and other post-Soviet countries. --Vladislavus (talk) 12:23, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. howcheng {chat} 02:24, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Original Uploader's request, permission not confirmed from the photographer (OTRS) Amitie 10g (talk) 15:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:24, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

These are derivative works of an artwork by Laura Kimpton and Jeff Schomberg. There is no FOP for sculptures in the US. The permission of the artist is necessary.

BrightRaven (talk) 15:31, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:26, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Andrew76-77 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Non-free book covers.

XXN, 15:44, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:26, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

PD text logo, although this will be copyrighted in its home country, the United Kingdom, and therefore cannot be hosted on Commons. Cloudbound (talk) 22:40, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I know that the threshold of originality is low at the UK, but this logo is really simple. Fma12 (talk) 22:55, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: FASTILY (TALK) 01:10, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

This logo was already nominated for deletion once and kept under the assumption that it is too simple for both UK and US law. However, Commons:Deletion requests/Two British logos and the court ruling here make it a bit questionable with regards to the originality under UK law: That ruling did find a stretched slash and projecting bar in the middle of the Es (en:File:EDGE magazine (logo).svg) as original enough to create a copyright claim. The difference in fonts and the square dot might qualify this as original enough as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:11, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. howcheng {chat} 02:27, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Author request. Mazta (talk) 19:21, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:34, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Despite the large size of this file, there is no indication that the uploader is the creator of the image. No metadata. File is not in use. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:21, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep: No proof of copyvio. File uploaded in 2013 and Google Image Search didn't returned any results of this image rather than Commons, and it contains Exif, and IMHO, could be useful. --Amitie 10g (talk) 01:23, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. howcheng {chat} 02:34, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Author request. Mazta (talk) 19:21, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 02:35, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No clue where this picture was taken (lack of sensible description), really small by 2010's and today's standard. In sum, not really educational useful. Grand-Duc (talk) 21:40, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. howcheng {chat} 02:49, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP in Italy Elisfkc (talk) 22:03, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: honestly, no. Saw it was in Italy, and went with COM:PRP. Elisfkc (talk) 18:50, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. howcheng {chat} 02:50, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

book cover Prométhée (talk) 21:07, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:44, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

no educational value, wings changing color, in reality the color of the wings of southwest airlines aircraft has not changed PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep. I believe you have misunderstood the purpose of the image. The animation is simply to point out which parts of the aircraft are the wings. howcheng {chat} 02:16, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: in use. --Jcb (talk) 21:21, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Cafarnaumba, who also claimed to be the author of the related coat of arms of Brazilian municipality (but which was grabbed from Internet).

May be in public domain by other means but relevant info (proper author/date of creation or first disclosure information) must be provided to determine copyrights status. Gunnex (talk) 17:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:22, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused television screen capture of very low quality and YouTube provenance. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:26, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It fits the following: "It is a photographic or cinematic work that is not compositive (artistic in nature) first published before 1 January 1999" Hashima20 (talk) 16:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC+3)


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:21, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

This doesn't seem to be the same image covered in two prior Deletion Nominations. This image is doodle art by a non-notable artist. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:32, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:23, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

We have to delete the logo it is copyrighted, even the Parc Naturel Régional Périgord-Limousin has restriction in use, that is why they have a second visual identity. (En français: D'après l'information du Parc il y a un droit d'auteur sur ce logo, c'est pourquoi le parc à dévéloppé une deuxième identité visuelle. Si nos ne voulons pas d'ennuis il faut supprimer le fichier.) Traumrune (talk) 19:43, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour. J'ai retiré le logo sur l'article Flavignac où il n'avait rien à y faire. S'il y a d'autres articles où il n'a rien à faire, il suffit de l'indiquer pour qu'on fasse le ménage. En dehors de cela, il figure sur l'article principal Parc naturel régional Périgord-Limousin et devrait pouvoir y être conservé. Mais, il faudrait alors le sortir de commons et le rapatrier sur Wikipédia, comme tous les logos. Est-ce que quelqu'un sait faire la manip ? Père Igor (talk) 15:17, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
J'ai évoqué le problème sur les Questions techniques de wikipédia. Père Igor (talk) 15:25, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Le logo a été importé sur Wikipédia en français par Thibaut120094. Il peut être supprimé de commons. Père Igor (talk) 10:01, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Si je consulte cette page qui concerne l'ensemble des logos des parcs naturels régionaux français, il y est indiqué qu'ils sont dans le domaine public car il s'agirait de logotypes que l'on peut trouver sur les panneaux indicateurs des routes. Je n'y connais rien en réutilisation de ces panneaux. Père Igor (talk) 10:12, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note : le logo n'a pas été importé sur fr.wikipedia, seule la page de description a été importée. Bloody-libu (talk) 17:37, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah zut je pensais que fr:Special:Import importait l'image aussi. --Thibaut120094 (talk) 18:22, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Non, ça aurait été trop simple... il faut le téléverser soi-même (voir exemple). Bloody-libu (talk) 21:36, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour. Je tiens l'information sur les problèmes de droits du logo, des employés du parc. Si c'est nécessaire je pourrais les contacter. Le visuel (terminologie du parc) utilisé actuellement est celui sur leur page d'accueil en haut à gauche [13]. Traumrune (talk) 20:09, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ca sert à quoi un logo (probablement payé à prix d'or) qu'on ne peut pas utiliser pour parler de ce qu'il désigne ? Nous feront-ils vraiment des ennuis pour cela ? Quelqu'un pourrait peut-être leur demander une autorisation explicite ? SGlad (talk) 09:54, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:49, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

The uploader claims that the photographer and the person depicted are the same. Mai-Sachme (talk) 10:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:28, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope, Not educationally useful, becausse this is a wrong flag. The lion doesn't have two tales, see: http://www.knm.nl/CmsData/Artikelen/Fotos/9/0/5/090531/090531_e_or_2.jpg, I did mention the error on the talkpage from the uploader, but he/she seems to not active anymore since 2 years. Arch (talk) 19:59, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep -- If there's a minor problem with the file (in use in many places), the answer is to fix it, not delete it. AnonMoos (talk) 22:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete - Not a minor error, but a big one. If the uploader doesn't react to request to change the errors we should delete it. Commons is the file database of Wikipedia, Wikipedia should use only correct files and thus there should only be correct files on Commons. Dqfn13 (talk) 07:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep - It's a variant of the Benelux flag. 174.113.214.250 18:24, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are no variants on the Benelux "flag". As a matter of fact, the Benelux "flag" isn't a flag at all. Its a officious flag, invented by a chairman of a local club at Nice. Therefore there's only one unique design, not "variants". --Arch (talk) 19:22, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • 1) English "Officious" does not translate French "Officieux". 2) If it's not officially adopted, then some would take the view that there's no official specification... AnonMoos (talk) 03:27, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        • 1) ??????? 2) It has nothing to do with adoptation, Julius Hoste, a Belgium minister revealed the "flag" 60 years ago according to a design by Guy de Wargny. Displaying a design belongs to a reliable representation. The lion should be the lion from Brabant, File:Royal Arms of Belgium.svg this lion doesnt have two tails. If its a n unofficial flag, or not, as long there's a coat of arms on it, like File:Unofficial Flag of Germany (with Coat of arms).png this unofficial one, or File:Flag of the United States Customs Service.svg the coat of arms must be right, not have two heads on the birds by example. Wikipedia should be educational, above all reliable. It is noteworthy that there is in use a wrong flag image on articles about the Benelux, which is not a reliable display. --Arch (talk) 06:17, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
          • Dude, the word "officious" as you used it would convey very little meaning to an ordinary English speaker, who was not able to translate a fr:Faux-ami into French and back. And it seems to me that if a flag is not officially-defined, then people are free to vary it however they want, and can't necessarily be proven "wrong"... AnonMoos (talk) 15:56, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
            • I'm not an English speaking person, please consider that, instead making jokes about language situations, keep in mind please. What should I have to do with French language as we here in English communication?? By my knowledge does "officious" mean "not official". How often I see bad English on Commons? Yes, becausse it's international, Well, I dont care. I read between the lines to understand what they mean to say, if not, you can always say: I'm sorry, I dont think that I understand you, what are you trying to say to me? Be gentle! If I translate "dude" to Dutch, the outcome will be an insult word. Viva online translations! You know what I mean. I have placed examples of the original design, flag as well an coin, that's how the flag should look. NOT I repeat NOT two tails. Uploader indicates no response to made corrections. You can say that everybody is free to made their own versions, I'm not agree. If I made a wrong version from the flag of Turkey, with a 7 point star and the crescend moon too small, and put it everywhere, that will be inexcusable. The benelux "flag" is officially-defined, but not recognized! A whole other story. This is the last time I'll try to defend my position. I guess communication is really a problem, how clearly I must be? --Arch (talk) 16:31, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Arch -- I'm really not trying to beat up on you for not being a native English-speaker, but the fact remains that the word "officious" does not mean what you think it means (it's often conjoined with "busybody", almost never with "flag"), and would convey almost no meaning to a monolingual English-speaker in the way that you used it. And the flag of Turkey is completely irrelevant in this context, since it's fully official with an official precise specification. AnonMoos (talk) 03:05, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Arch, in English officious means opdringerig (pushy), bemoeiziek (meddlesome), and just rarely unofficial. Dqfn13 (talk) 10:07, 4 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: in use, so not out of scope. --Jcb (talk) 21:27, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Trophy was not created by photographer, and is thus a COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:21, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: trophy is DM, you can hardly see any design details. --Jcb (talk) 22:02, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status. EugeneZelenko(talk) 14:31, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The photo depicts one of the most important yugoslav and croatian expressionist painters of the pre and post war european art scene. Furthermore, the photo has been taken in 1923 by the photographer Milan Jovanovic leading artist in the pre WWII Kingdom of Yugoslavia. So the value of the subject photo is both historicaly and artisticaly important. Above all, there are no copyright issue in this case at all. The photo dates from 1923 and is my property by inheritance. Thanks for your attention. Kind regards DanhauserJ . --DanhauserJ(talk)


Deleted: Milan Jovanović was born in Austria-Hungary but died in 1944 in that part of Yugoslavia that is now Serbia. His main connection appears to be Yugoslavia, and this would have been inherited by Serbia, which has a pma+70 rule. Thus the photo would have become PD in Serbia on 1 January 2015. However, the dreadful URAA means that it is protected in the US for 95 years from 1923 i.e. until at least January 2018 or 2019 depending on the exact date. Note that the 1923 exception in the US applies to works from before 1 January 1923. Green Giant (talk) 22:22, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]


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

I'm not sure if this picture is OK for commons. The picture of the radio woman might be old enough to be PD, but hard to tell without a source. It isn't the clearest picture so it might be de minimus. Anyhow, this picture doesn't ad much to the coverage of the hackathon so I wouldn't consider it a great loss if it were deleted. Vera (talk) 17:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We are obtaining an approval from Hansen house for all of the pictures we took of their plaques, pictures and artifacts. They were close for Passover last week, and only return to work today. Can you give us a little more time to get the permission? Thanks. Daryag (talk) 07:38, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: the picture on the monitor is DM. --Jcb (talk) 14:08, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of Richardstickel

[edit]

Richardstickel (talk · contribs) uploaded these files:

Only simple logos can be in Commons without OTRS-permission. Taivo (talk) 07:37, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:56, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:41, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep. See Category:National Assembly of Serbia for similar images. howcheng {chat} 02:20, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: currently in use in a Wikipedia article. --Jcb (talk) 21:35, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

neither aircraft is very clearly visible, aircraft registration number can't be read on either plane, (aircraft registration number is a wikimedia requirement) PlanespotterA320 (talk) 16:47, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 21:36, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

File isn't in use thus leaving it to be "dead"/obsolete... Dennis David Auger (talk) 17:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep. Not a valid reason for deletion. We have lots of images on Commons that are not in use in any wiki. howcheng {chat} 02:29, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 21:55, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

File isn't in use thus leaving it to be "dead"/obsolete... Dennis David Auger (talk) 17:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep. Not a valid reason for deletion. We have lots of images on Commons that are not in use in any wiki. howcheng {chat} 02:30, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 21:37, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is no indication that this image fits any of the qualifications for the license it was given. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:24, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It fits the following: "It is a photographic or cinematic work that is not compositive (artistic in nature) first published before 1 January 1999" Hashima20 (talk) 16:00, 28 April 2016 (UTC+3)


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:15, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

The photographer did not create the depicted tropy and cannot license it freely. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:55, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-credible claim of own work on this group shot of a winning footie team holding a trophy the photographer (whoever that really was) did not create. No metadata, obviously professional image. User's upload gallery does not support indication of creation of images of this quality. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:29, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is a photograph that was taken by me as a professional sports photographer that has the rights to enter Iraqi Premier League stadiums and take photos of matches. Hashima20 (talk) 16:05, 28 April 2016 (UTC+3)


Deleted: please contact OTRS for verification. --Jcb (talk) 21:35, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No indication of user's own work on this 1939 photo which can be found in several places in the internet, see [14]. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This image is a contextually appropriate crop of a picture published by the British government in 1939 which has been in the public domain for many years. User:Bravo two one

On the upload template it says "own work" by uploader, nothing about a British government publication. You can't have it both ways. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:33, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:54, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

I marked this file as duplicate of File:Suomen poliisin miekkatunnus.svg. The uploader (Coat af arms (talk · contribs)) objected with the following rationale:

The file Suomen poliisi.svg is not an exact duplicate version of the Suomen poliisin miekkatunnus.svg:
the Suomen poliisi.svg has a white colour (with blue contours), but the Suomen poliisin miekkatunnus.svg is transparent.
Infact, perhaps the colour of the Suomen poliisi.svg should be argent (silver), white metal (gray) instead of white, look at the file Supo old badge.svg: .
--Coat af arms (talk) 17:44, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the uploader's objection I have converted the speedy duplicate to normal deletion request. MKFI (talk) 19:31, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Sockpuppet. Fry1989 eh? 16:08, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep The file Suomen poliisi.svg has a white colour (with blue contours), but the file Suomen poliisin miekkatunnus.svg is transparent (should not be). --Coat af arms (talk) 12:49, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as it is uploaded by a sockpuppet. --Stryn (talk) 20:07, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:38, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Timbre de 2006, gravé par Ève Luquet, encore vivante. Voir ici. Pitthée (talk) 19:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour, je pensais qu'il n'y avait pas de droits concernant les timbres. Cordialement.
Je me réfère à cette page. --Pitthée (talk) 23:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:38, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photo quite identical to File:Louvre Museum (7463276340).jpg ; no information about any difference ; I proposed to delete the other one, but 3 wikipedians prefer the other one. So I propose to delete the present one. Tangopaso (talk) 20:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep. There's no reason why we can't have more than one photo of the same item. howcheng {chat} 02:48, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep - not identical and views seem to have differed as to which is best. No harm in keeping both. WJBscribe (talk) 18:14, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 21:14, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by NiFaRue (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Commons:Derivative works from modern art. Does Commons:Freedom of panorama in country of shooting allow this?

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:34, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 22:17, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]