Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2016/05/27
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
_-_WGA02573.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_débat_dans_le_salle_300_(8077185217).jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
all the work of the user are copyvio maybe this too Reda Kerbouche (talk) 06:26, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted, because thirty copyvio files from the internet means the one similar file is also likely to be copyvio. Green Giant (talk) 10:02, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
File:Hieronymus Bosch - Mankind Beset by Devils (reverse of Rebel Angels panel) - WGA02573.jpg
[edit]_-_WGA02573.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_WGA02573.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Almost an exact duplicate of File:Jheronimus Bosch Allegories 1 (before restoration).jpg. Not in use. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 08:41, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Jarekt (talk) 11:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
file created by mistake. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:47, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: no file. --Jarekt (talk) 13:20, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
File:A Modern Affair Robert Joy with Lisa Eichhorn romantic comedy directed by Vern Oakley.jpg
[edit]
unlikely to be own work, pixeled screenshot, probably from somewhere from the internet, no exif, no further information Queryzo (talk) 09:05, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted by Green Giant: Mass deletion of pages added by Vivolog: copyright movie stills; if you are the producer, please read COM:OTRS and COM:ET.
file created by mistake. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 11:59, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: no file. --Jarekt (talk) 13:20, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Bo obok tego loga jest niepotrzebna litera R w kółku. Madzia29734 (talk) 18:21, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
@Madzia29734: English, please. Thanks! --Soluvo (talk) 19:16, 29 April 2016 (UTC)- This is a multilingual project, not the English Wikipedia. Riley Huntley (talk) 04:52, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; request to delete the file based on the "unnecassary R with a circle". Riley Huntley (talk) 04:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Bo jest niepotrzebna litera R. Madzia29734 (talk) 11:32, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Riley Huntley (talk) 19:02, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Bo ten użytkownik przesłał złe logo Infiniti. 81.219.4.46 17:02, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Bo jest niepoprawny, ponieważ obok loga jest duża litera R w kółku, a jej nie powinno moim zdaniem być, czyli - innymi słowy - jest ona niepotrzebna. 81.219.4.46 17:28, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense request. We don't delete user talk pages. ★ Poké95 23:54, 27 May 2016 (UTC) (non-admin close)
Dateiname irreführend, Datei wird nicht benötigt, irrtümlich hochgeladen CTHOE (talk) 15:08, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted by Taivo: Author requested deletion of page: author's request on creation day
Violação de direitos RogerAtaide (talk) 19:28, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: speedy deleted. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:58, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation Wikifido (talk) 09:44, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:NETCOPYVIO. --Martin H. (talk) 10:20, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation Wikifido (talk) 09:49, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:NETCOPYVIO. --Martin H. (talk) 10:21, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation Wikifido (talk) 09:49, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:NETCOPYVIO. --Martin H. (talk) 10:22, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation Wikifido (talk) 09:49, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:NETCOPYVIO. --Martin H. (talk) 10:21, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Copyrighted artwork of http://www.jamari-lior.com/. Unclear if uploader has the right to upload these images to Wikimedia Commons under a CC BY-SA 4.0 license.
- File:Wired Future.jpg
- File:Lace and Time I.jpg
- File:Lace & Time II.jpg
- File:Static Sport.jpg
- File:Mehendi Artists.jpg
- File:The new Fall of the Damned.jpg
- File:Let them eat cake.jpg
Takeaway (talk) 10:15, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Keep: Permission already received. --Amitie 10g (talk) 00:41, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Kept: Permission confirmed. --Amitie 10g (talk) 16:40, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
uploaded by mistake Armineaghayan (talk) 11:27, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader requested deletion, unused. --Didym (talk) 15:59, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by CyrilDelacour (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal artwork without obvious educational use, not used in encyclopedic space (though proposed by uploader on various talk pages).
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 22.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 21.jpg
File:Prison et vie carcérale 20.jpg
I withdraw my nomination for this image- File:Prison et vie carcérale 18.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 19.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 17.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 16.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 14.jpg
File:Prison et vie carcérale 15.jpg I withdraw my nomination for this image- File:Prison et vie carcérale 12.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 13.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 11.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 08.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 10.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 09.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 06.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 07.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 05.jpg
File:Prison et vie carcérale 02.jpg I withdraw my nomination for this image- File:Prison et vie carcérale 03.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale 04.jpg
- File:Prison et vie carcérale-01.jpg
— Racconish ☎ 09:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Au contraire ! Il y a beaucoup de demandes d'illustration pour les prisons et rares sont les illustrations qui montrent la vie carcérale, c'est à dire des détenus. Je crois plutôt que ce qui dérange ce n'est pas le "project:scope" mais la raison de la détention d'un artiste et qui est donnée dans chaque description et dans chaque fichier et qui implique le frère-député Pascal Terrasse : https://injustifiables.wordpress.com // Censure (censorship) pour ne pas "faire la lumière sur" ! - Cyril Delacour (talk) 13:20, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
All these files are in use on the discussion page project "Prison" : w:fr:Discussion_Projet:Prison#Illustrations
This one (w:fr:Prison ) is in use :
Comment Proposing images on a talk page is not justifying their EV. And actually, you did not wait for any comment before adding one of them to an article... — Racconish ☎ 13:37, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- YOU don't wait for any comment before asking suppression of these files Cyril Delacour (talk) 14:14, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Il invoque une raison qu'il provoque (il supprime lui-même le fichier là où il est utilisé sous un autre prétexte -> POV personnel) : https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prison&action=history Cyril Delacour (talk) 14:50, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Affaire politique en lien avec cette caricature (demande de suppression aussi of course) du député Pascal Terrasse réalisée en prison.
- Comment Please stay calm and discuss ad rem, not ad personam. Accusing me of having a personal agenda or beeing a free-mason [1] is not constructive. — Racconish ☎ 16:53, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Je n'ai pas accusé, j'ai demandé si vous êtes un franc-maçon, ce qui pose un problème de neutralité vu le serment d'entre-aide (voir ce qu'en dit l'ex Procureur Éric de Montgolfier par exemple) au cas où vous êtes franc-maçon, puisque le député PS Pascal Terrasse l'est comme c'est révélé sur cet article qui diffuse une lettre de la fraternelle des parlementaires en soutien, lettre qui évoque de l'obscurantisme. Connaissant d'expérience comment s'articule le langage de cette secte (à l'envers) l'obscurantisme serait ici votre censure, censure que vos actes révèlent ici par exemple : https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prison&action=history et vous mettez (à l'envers toujours) la charrue avant les bœufs en justifiant la suppression d'un fichier aussi par son manque d'utilisation alors que vous en êtes responsable. Ce sont des méthodes qui à mon avis ne sont pas tolérables par la communauté que représente Commons et Wikipédia et il est donc de mon devoir et de ma responsabilité de les exposer. Donc la question reste en suspens : est-ce que vous êtes oui ou non franc-maçon ? Au cas où vous ne voulez pas répondre à cette question je demande à la communauté de ne pas tenir compte de vos interventions et demandes, et au cas où vous répondez par l'affirmative, de ne pas en tenir compte non plus en raison donc d'un manque de neutralité. Cyril Delacour (talk) 17:06, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Comment Kindly assume good faith and avoid arguing ad personam. — Racconish ☎ 17:11, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Je n'ai pas accusé, j'ai demandé si vous êtes un franc-maçon, ce qui pose un problème de neutralité vu le serment d'entre-aide (voir ce qu'en dit l'ex Procureur Éric de Montgolfier par exemple) au cas où vous êtes franc-maçon, puisque le député PS Pascal Terrasse l'est comme c'est révélé sur cet article qui diffuse une lettre de la fraternelle des parlementaires en soutien, lettre qui évoque de l'obscurantisme. Connaissant d'expérience comment s'articule le langage de cette secte (à l'envers) l'obscurantisme serait ici votre censure, censure que vos actes révèlent ici par exemple : https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prison&action=history et vous mettez (à l'envers toujours) la charrue avant les bœufs en justifiant la suppression d'un fichier aussi par son manque d'utilisation alors que vous en êtes responsable. Ce sont des méthodes qui à mon avis ne sont pas tolérables par la communauté que représente Commons et Wikipédia et il est donc de mon devoir et de ma responsabilité de les exposer. Donc la question reste en suspens : est-ce que vous êtes oui ou non franc-maçon ? Au cas où vous ne voulez pas répondre à cette question je demande à la communauté de ne pas tenir compte de vos interventions et demandes, et au cas où vous répondez par l'affirmative, de ne pas en tenir compte non plus en raison donc d'un manque de neutralité. Cyril Delacour (talk) 17:06, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Strong keep. Per COM:SCOPE. Sketches represent a documentation on the equipment, the setup and how humans interact with the prison space. As such there are reasonably usable to support any article on the life in prison. They are really interesting and capture well the essence of the place. The educative and informative value is so established. --Dereckson (talk) 16:13, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep I have no issue with drawings, so in the absolute I would deem these acceptable. In this case, it is not possible to photograph the interiors of French prisons, especially the daily lives of the inmates; these images are thus not only acceptable, but of considerable interest. The behaviour of the author (full disclosure: I blocked him from Commons for his comments above), or the special case of File:Caricature Pascal Terrasse.jpg, should not influence our judgement on these drawings. Rama (talk) 16:18, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Comment I do understand what you two mean. My first reaction was the same as yours. Then I started looking more closely at these images and found them at the same time vague and very related to a personal history, hence unlikely to be used in any article. I would be very happy to withdraw my nomination for those particular images which you would find really encyclopedic. — Racconish ☎ 16:26, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- A photography, a drawing will choose what to represent, what not to represent, as such the perfectly objective illustration couldn't exist. A personal testimony, a certain point of view is acceptable on Commons, as long as there is educative value, ie providing knowledge; instructional or informative. --Dereckson (talk) 16:31, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Comment That is perfectly right. But a vague or unspecific sketch is useless, as well as a blurry low res photo. I relooked carefully at each picture and withdrew my nomination for 3 of them. Do you really care about the others ? — Racconish ☎ 16:37, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- A photography, a drawing will choose what to represent, what not to represent, as such the perfectly objective illustration couldn't exist. A personal testimony, a certain point of view is acceptable on Commons, as long as there is educative value, ie providing knowledge; instructional or informative. --Dereckson (talk) 16:31, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Je serais pour garder ces fichiers. Étant donné que des photos sont probablement impossibles, des dessins les remplaçant pourraient être acceptables. Il faudrait quand même que le description des fichiers ne soient pas des essais personnels (mais ça peut se corriger après-coup). Cordialement, Yann (talk) 16:47, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- Fair enough : I withdraw my nomination per Yann. — Racconish ☎ 16:55, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Kept: Consensus en vue de la conservation. Nomination withdrawn by requester, after an unanimous agreement after an exchange betweeen DR participants to keep the pictures. --Dereckson (talk) 17:02, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Is this really such simply imagery to be considered public domain? Many campaign logos are less than this and I think a more conservative position would be considered this a non-free image. And because the election is in a few days, I am only suggesting that this should be considered non-free and sent back to English (the only place where it is used) and for limited usage there rather than the broad usage currently being done now. Ricky81682 (talk) 09:14, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 10:08, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Per COM:SELFIE. Not educationally useful. - MrX 01:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:31, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
scope? own work? Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:28, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:31, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:30, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:31, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:31, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:32, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:33, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:33, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:33, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:33, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Abdullahshoro8 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
- File:Abdullah Shoro r.jpg
- File:Abdullah shoro NO6.jpg
- File:Abdullah shoro NO5.jpg
- File:Abdullah shoro pic NO4.jpg
- File:Abdullah shoro pic NO3.jpg
- File:Abdullah shoro pic No2.jpg
- File:Abdullah Shoro.jpg
--ghouston (talk) 05:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:34, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image --ghouston (talk) 05:21, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:34, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Muzamil Junaid (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
--ghouston (talk) 05:30, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:35, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope IagoQnsi (talk) 06:08, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:35, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 09:12, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:36, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Source given as flickr - but no permission info. Likely copyvio Gbawden (talk) 09:15, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: likely cpyright violation. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:37, 3 June 2016 This was taken from the "Commons" section in Flickr, how come you delete it??? It has also the info and proper licenses. --Sicaspi (talk) 17:44, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
(UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Wcam (talk) 18:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:43, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Unused personal image, out of scope Wcam (talk) 18:05, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:44, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photograph Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 18:42, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:45, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photograph Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 18:42, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:45, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photograph Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 18:45, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:46, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photograph Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 18:51, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:46, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photograph Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 18:52, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:46, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photograph Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 18:52, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:47, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photograph Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 18:52, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:47, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photograph Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 18:53, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Delete out of project scope per nomination. And there is no release under a free license. The copyright tag of this file - PD-US, published before 1923 - is certainly invalid. --Martin H. (talk) 19:52, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:42, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photograph Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 18:54, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:42, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
COM:SCOPE ~riley (talk) 18:55, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:43, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
unused personal photos, out of scope Pippobuono (talk) 19:59, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Out of scope. ~ Moheen (talk) 20:42, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:41, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
unused personal photos, out of scope Pippobuono (talk) 20:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Out of scope. ~ Moheen (talk) 20:39, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:41, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Possibly out of scope. ~ Moheen (talk) 20:02, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:41, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Possibly out of scope. No uses also.) ~ Moheen (talk) 20:10, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:39, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
A logo of a commercial co-working space, not in use. Looks like it's out of scope Hexafluoride (talk) 23:18, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:39, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope. Very low resolution (and huge size somehow) Hexafluoride (talk) 23:34, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:38, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope. Not in use and might be advertisement (Turkish description translated through Google) Hexafluoride (talk) 23:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:38, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mklambatsea (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://www.soundandmusic.org/sites/default/files/imagecache/four_column/sampler/events/thumbnail/MARIKA%20calamity%20jane.jpg.
- File:MARIKA KLAMBATSEA PLAYING PIANO AT - SLEEPING BEAUTY -MUSIC PERFORMANCE.jpg
- File:MARIKA KLAMBATSEA.jpg
- File:KANONEN SONG - MARIKA KLAMBATSEA-THE TRAINS - AT MEGARO CONCERT HALL IN ATHENS.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:40, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 21:07, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Historical photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:40, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 21:07, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:41, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 21:06, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Looks like an unauthorised screenshot Richard Avery (talk) 14:45, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 21:02, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Unused, Unoffical sign, so may be out of scope Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:51, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 21:01, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Unused, unofficial sign, Out of scope. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:51, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 21:01, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
obviously a screenshot from somewhere, probably not the uploader's own work El Grafo (talk) 15:20, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:59, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
out of project scope; logo of a administration office of five employees uploaded without consent by the child of the company owner MoiraMoira (talk) 15:26, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:59, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
The EXIF indicates that this file comes from Facebook, so we need evidence of permission from the Facebook user. The image might also be out of scope for Commons. Stefan2 (talk) 15:31, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:57, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Prank, not used by any article. DreamLiner (talk) 15:59, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:56, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
used as vandalism on an article of pt.wikipedia Pippobuono (talk) 16:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:56, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
out of scope, only purpose was vandalism on pt.wikipedia Pippobuono (talk) 16:01, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:55, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
out of scope; only purpose was vandalism on pt.wikipedia Pippobuono (talk) 16:01, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:55, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
out of scope, only purpose was vandalims on pt.wikipedia Pippobuono (talk) 16:02, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:55, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
out of scope, only purpose was vandalism on pt.wikipedia Pippobuono (talk) 16:02, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:54, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
imho rather 'posing/profiling', file not in use at Wikimedia projects, and doubtful educational usefulness, hence out of scope Wikimedia Commons, Roland zh (talk) 17:19, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:53, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
as per File:రామ్.jpg rather 'profiling' etc, Roland zh (talk) 17:21, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:53, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Screenshot with unknown copyright status, the uploader's last remaining contribution among obvious copyright violations. Taivo (talk) 17:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:52, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
The uploader is not the author, and there's no proof of the author having published it in public domain. SSYoung (talk) 17:49, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:52, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Possible copyviol: gmaps screenshot Ciaurlec (talk) 17:51, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:51, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photograph Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 18:42, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:51, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
probable copyvio, hardly own work Pippobuono (talk) 19:43, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:50, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Image taken from an unofficial fansite with no evidence of claimed licence. January (talk) 19:46, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:50, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
presumably, the webpage and the logos it contains is copyright of the site itself; the image does appear to be taken using Firefox browser, but I don't believe the page's content is allowed for free use as labeled here. Only (talk) 20:15, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Delete In the bottom of the website, it says: "© 2016 SparkNotes LLC, All Rights Reserved". --★ Poké95 02:00, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Deleting the article it was made for. PokestarFan (talk) 13:17, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:49, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
probably not own work : can be found there http://web.archive.org/web/20060307105455/http://www.shipmodeling.ca/aa0000.html since 2006. Florn (talk) 22:50, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Look at it this way; the web site you indicated, which sells a model of the ship, took it from another source and they have no copyright. If you remove this photo, no one will know what the Algonquin ship looked like.--Captain Morgan (talk) 04:03, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:48, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Copyrighted poster. Thibaut120094 (talk) 22:55, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Bonjour, je voudrais savoir pourquoi cette image a été retirée de cet article. Merci --Embu wiki (talk) 20:17, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- Bonjour, car il s'agit d'une œuvre sous licence non-libre. Ni Wikipédia en français, ni Wikimedia Commons n'acceptent les images sous fair use, voir fr:WP:FAIRUSE ou COM:L/fr. Cordialement. --Thibaut120094 (talk) 20:59, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:46, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:38, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 21:08, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused advertisement of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:38, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 21:08, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 09:17, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:39, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope. Used on a promotional user page Gbawden (talk) 10:02, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:38, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 10:03, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:37, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Same file as File:CG 150 2014.jpg Cjp24 (talk) 22:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: by Steinsplitter. Yann (talk) 17:13, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
This is not a pre-1923 photo as the given license requires. JuTa 07:38, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: by User:Fastily as copyright violation. --JuTa 18:45, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Low quality unused personal image Rodhullandemu (talk) 11:57, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
unused personal image Rodhullandemu (talk) 11:58, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:41, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unclear copyright status. Uploader not identical with author (identified by uploader as "WHITE KITCHEN", which is a commercial promoter [2]). Jergen (talk) 12:34, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted by Jcb: Missing permission as of 27 May 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.
want to rename file กรกฎรัตนไพศาลย์ (talk) 03:25, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: no permission from the copyright holder (copyvio). --Wdwd (talk) 12:06, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
some work of this user are copyvio, no EXIF data, unused, small
- File:Bouzid12.jpg
- File:Bouzid (14).jpg
- File:Bouzid (13).jpg
- File:Bouzid (12).jpg
- File:Bouzid (10).jpg
- File:Bouzid (9).jpg
- File:Bouzid (8).jpg
- File:Bouzid (7).jpg
- File:Bouzid (6).jpg
- File:Bouzid (4).jpg
- File:Bouzid (3).jpg
- File:Bouzid (1).jpg
- File:Bouzid (2).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Reda Kerbouche (talk) 06:36, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, copyvio, com:pcp. --Wdwd (talk) 12:10, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Unfortunately Japanese copyright law does not allow modern art works to reproduced for commercial purposes, so they are not free enough to be uploaded to Commons. See Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Japan. DAJF (talk) 07:22, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- I uploaded a new version where I cropped out the artistic work. Maybe an admin could delete the previous version only? Mathieu MD (talk) 10:02, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: deleted first file version: no permission for shown artwork. --Wdwd (talk) 12:15, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
As per Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Japan, art works located in public cannot be uploaded to Commons. DAJF (talk) 07:30, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 12:18, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
not own work Tomas62 (talk) 08:58, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 12:28, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
File:Chéries-Chéris & Sébastien Lifshitz (Les Invisibles) débat dans le salle 300 (8077185217).jpg
[edit]_d%C3%A9bat_dans_le_salle_300_(8077185217).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_d%C3%A9bat_dans_le_salle_300_(8077185217).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
contains derivated work (picture in the magazin), furthermore img is not really good Queryzo (talk) 09:19, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 12:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
the photo might be cc-by-2.0, but what about the big in the background, I see no permission Queryzo (talk) 09:29, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: no permission, copyvio. Photos from TED events or videos are cc-nc-*. --Wdwd (talk) 12:34, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Extremely unlikely to be own work, clearly meant for advertising purposes per the description Gbawden (talk) 10:15, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 12:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Raja ali raza janjua (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal photos, out of scope
Gbawden (talk) 10:17, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 12:36, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mjravichandran1 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal photos, out of scope
Gbawden (talk) 10:19, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, kept last file (file is in use on a user page). --Wdwd (talk) 12:39, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Youngcash2300 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal photos out of scope
Gbawden (talk) 10:24, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: first per nomination, kept last one (in use). --Wdwd (talk) 12:42, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by YoungTy&Nunnie (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal photos, out of scope
Gbawden (talk) 10:27, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 12:43, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
some jokes Konto na chwilę (talk) 10:57, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Wdwd (talk) 12:47, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
This is not Anville but Montigné nearby. Cantepien (talk) 10:57, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Wdwd (talk) 12:46, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
This is not Anville but Montigné nearby. Cantepien (talk) 10:58, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Wdwd (talk) 12:47, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Poor quality, blurry photo Konto na chwilę (talk) 11:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Photographing Romanesque capitals and bases in churches is sometimes difficult because of inaccessability and poor lighting. I have noticed that even in scientific literature photos are used that may not be up to normal standards, precisely because of this reason. Also, the images nominated for deletion here are quite essential to the article Westwerkaltaar Sint-Servaasbasiliek and there are no alternative images available. Kleon3 (talk) 14:13, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: In use, therefore in scope. --Amitie 10g (talk) 05:40, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Wdwd (talk) 12:52, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Poor quality, blurry photo Konto na chwilę (talk) 11:01, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Photographing Romanesque capitals and bases in churches is sometimes difficult because of inaccessability and poor lighting. I have noticed that even in scientific literature photos are used that might not be up to normal standards, precisely because of this reason. Also, the images nominated for deletion here are quite essential to the article Westwerkaltaar Sint-Servaasbasiliek and there are no alternative images available. Kleon3 (talk) 14:15, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: In use. --Amitie 10g (talk) 05:41, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Wdwd (talk) 12:52, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Poor quality, blurry photo Konto na chwilę (talk) 11:01, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Photographing Romanesque capitals and bases in churches is sometimes difficult because of inaccessability and poor lighting. I have noticed that even in scientific literature photos are used that might not be up to normal standards, precisely because of this reason. Also, the images nominated for deletion here are quite essential to the article Westwerkaltaar Sint-Servaasbasiliek and there are no alternative images available. Kleon3 (talk) 14:16, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: In use. --Amitie 10g (talk) 05:41, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Wdwd (talk) 12:52, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Logo of a national broadcast => copyrighted Remi Mathis (talk) 11:38, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Kept: below COM:ToO, in use. --Wdwd (talk) 12:53, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Doublon de File:Logo I-Télé 2013.png JessydeVilly (talk) 14:05, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Kept: in use. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 17:13, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
copyvio http://www.safe4u.de/index.php/alarmanlagen, out of scope, del. on DE Nolispanmo 13:26, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 12:58, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
copyvio http://www.safe4u.de/index.php/alarmanlagen, out of scope, del. on DE Nolispanmo 13:26, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 12:58, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
copyvio http://www.safe4u.de/index.php/alarmanlagen, out of scope, del. on DE Nolispanmo 13:26, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 12:58, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
This is obviously a copy of a copyrighted work. The uploader claims this as "own work" however it is published elsewhere and contains a photograph evidently by Connor O'Grady (it is his work which the advertised exhibition is about) Jbhunley (talk) 13:32, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 13:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
This photo is from [3] Jbhunley (talk) 13:34, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 13:01, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
File:Conor O Grady,I.R.An, 841mm x 1189mm, Manipulated pre-exisitng Graffitti, Numerous sites, 2013.jpg
[edit]
Obvious copyright violation. This is a work by Connor O'Grady not Lee Burroughs as they represent when claiming this as "own work". Jbhunley (talk) 13:48, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 13:02, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Obvious copyright violation. This is a work by Connor O'Grady not Lee Burroughs as they represent when claiming this as "own work". Jbhunley (talk) 13:48, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 13:03, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Obvious copyright violation. This is a work by Connor O'Grady not Lee Burroughs as they represent when claiming this as "own work". Jbhunley (talk) 13:49, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 13:03, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Marvellous001 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:29, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, com:pcp. --Wdwd (talk) 13:05, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 13:09, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Unused logos, certainly not own work and incorrectly licensed, even if some of them may be below TOO
- File:Samson 01.jpg
- File:Infoblox logo2.jpg
- File:Infoblox logo1.jpg
- File:Infoblox logo.jpg
- File:Box 01.gif
- File:Zendesk.jpg
- File:Sfdc.png
- File:Corsair.png
- File:Lithium-logo.png
- File:Bechtel-NC 4CSp.jpg
- File:GOH-logo.png
- File:Moz 01.jpeg
- File:Doorman.png
- File:Coupa Logo.jpg
- File:Glogin 05.png
- File:Glogin 04.png
- File:Glogin 03.png
- File:Glogin 01.png
- File:Glogin.png
- File:Vivintsolar.jpg
- File:Gcmlp.jpeg
- File:Vertafore.jpg
- File:ElementumLogo2.jpg
- File:ElementumLogo1.jpg
- File:JambaLOGO.jpg
- File:Truckstop.png
- File:Maphealth.png
- File:Jeppesen1.jpeg
- File:Bethematch04.jpg
- File:Bethematch03.jpg
- File:Bethematch02.jpg
- File:Bethematch01.jpg
- File:Bethematch.jpg
- File:Textura-Corp-logo 02.jpg
- File:Textura-Corp-logo 01.jpg
- File:Textura-Corp-logo.jpg
- File:Dnclogo 01.jpg
- File:Dnclogo.jpg
- File:Seqben.png
- File:Seq-ben.png
- File:Efi.png
- File:BHN.jpg
- File:BHN Logo 250x250px.jpg
- File:Vizient.jpeg
- File:Next2.png
- File:Next1.png
- File:Next.png
- File:Elca.png
- File:Vertafore 01.png
- File:Vertafore.png
- File:Beam suntory 02.jpg
- File:Beam suntory 01.jpg
- File:Beam suntory.jpg
- File:Aboutdirlogo.png
- File:Okta Logo BrightBlue Small (1).png
- File:Xceligent 01.gif
- File:Xceligent.gif
- File:Vidyo logo 03.jpg
- File:Vidyo logo 02.jpg
- File:Cropped fb4.png
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Didym (talk) 15:25, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 13:14, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos. Should be in SVG if useful.
- File:Okta - Logo.png
- File:Proquest n2.jpg
- File:Proquest new.jpg
- File:Proquest.png
- File:Xilinx white.jpg
- File:Xilinx black.png
- File:Btm.png
- File:Keysight-logo.png
- File:Gogo.jpg
- File:Nord logo.jpg
- File:Fico.png
- File:Veo logo.png
- File:Fin eng logo.png
- File:Palantir logo.png
- File:Sharepoint logo.jpg
- File:Box 01.gif
- File:Glogin.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:50, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Advertisement. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:Proquest bg.jpg
- File:5g-bg.jpg
- File:FindADocBanner.jpg
- File:Nordstorm bg.jpg
- File:Fico bg.jpg
- File:Fin eng.png
- File:04045 hollental 1440x900.jpg
- File:Illinois Chicago 2996x1740.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:53, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:49, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:02, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:42, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
incorrect definition Сарапулов (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Wdwd (talk) 13:44, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Don't ready... Oralvincent (talk) 19:55, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 13:48, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
wrong file uploaded by mistake Chrisuknudemale (talk) 20:53, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: self nomination of a recent upload, unused. --Wdwd (talk) 13:50, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
As per Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Japan art works in public in Japan cannot be uploaded to Commons. DAJF (talk) 07:32, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. --Yasu (talk) 17:02, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
The flag being a fake, the image is not reallstically useful for any educational purpose. In addition, its copyright status is quite dubious since there is no reason for us to believe that the design is old enough to be in the public domain. This file was nominated for deletion last January and kept on the basis that it was “in use”. Some discussion followed the decision, however, in which a consensus was formed that the flag was a fake. The file was then renamed “Fictional Flag of the Republic of Ezo.” All wikimedia projects have ceased to use the file, except Japanese Wikipedia which retains a link to this file in a talkpage (warning against the use of the fake flag image). Please also refer to the deletion request for the identical image here. Dwy (talk) 08:32, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Delete – I've looked into the origins of the this file (http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7772) and it's from the Ill Bethisad wiki, an alternate history project. It's a combination of the fictional "SNORist Republic of Ezo" flag with the Japanese Imperial Chrysanthemum. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 14:16, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- if it is indeed from the Ill Bethisad wiki, it does not seem to be a free content. The main page of that wiki says "The contents of these pages are copyright (C) by the creators of these pages." --Dwy (talk) 11:09, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per previous DR, and still in use. There is already concensus for fictional flags, most of the related DRs resolved as Kept). --Amitie 10g (talk) 05:44, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- The only use in all Wikimedia projects (as of the time of this nomination for deletion) was on a talk page in Japanese Wikipedia, where editors were warned that this flag is a fake and not to be used in the article. In the anticipation that this file will be deleted, I removed the warning. Now this file is no longer in use.--Dwy (talk) 09:03, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- Delete I did not understand the reason to survive. This image is a false flag. Do not forge a false flag in wikipedia. Related images has been removed. (Commons:Deletion requests/File:蝦夷共和國國旗.png).--伏儀 (talk) 09:22, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- Delete This is here without proper copyright release and even if we had it, there's no purpose to us storing someone's private fantasy world material. They already have a website; they don't need us. Mangoe (talk) 18:09, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 07:04, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Very very low quality, no exif, unlikely to be own work Gbawden (talk) 09:17, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, photographer should confirm license via COM:OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 07:05, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
All uploaded as "The character *name* in the webcomic Tattiche Difettose. Image created using GMod v.9" - at best these are screenshots of a webcomic, at worst they're copyrighted 3D artwork from Garry's Mod, which was apparently used to make the comic.
- File:Pvt R Utah.jpg
- File:Sgt J Winters.jpg
- File:Pvt S Green.jpg
- File:Cpl T Hicks.jpg
- File:Pvt M Collins.jpg
McGeddon (talk) 10:44, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Copyright holder should confirm license via COM:OTRS to clear up copyright concerns, however there will likely remain scope issues. --Storkk (talk) 07:08, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Improper license and source RoldBoxing (talk) 10:06, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
no permission or license given in source used but the opposite in the permission link under File:MannyPacq.jpg saying sorry I have no idea what you are on about 80.235.147.186 18:00, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Unless demonstrated otherwise, this is a copyright violation. The source given for permission is a user talk page at boxrec.com. The user quite clearly refutes the idea that permission has been given. Green Giant (talk) 11:52, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Melbourne Stars (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photo and logo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:36, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:03, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Nominal G7, Abandoned project Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:39, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:12, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Seemingly abandoned atttempt to draft a warning template for some images. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:40, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:12, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Abandoned template , which seems to have been unused for some time, Nominal G7 as I wrote this either on this account or my main one. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:42, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:12, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Seemingly abandoned project on my main account, Not G7 as another contributor added some content Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:43, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:12, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Diego Cerdá Vargas (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical painting and book. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
- File:Retrato de Diego Ortiz.jpg
- File:Intabulatura de lauto libro primo (Venecia, 1507), de Spinacino.png
,_de_Spinacino.png){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: both deleted but one redirect created as the file were used and a duplicate apparently correctly licenced exist. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:19, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Better version is available (see: File:13rd SS Division Logo.svg)--Der Rationalist (talk) 16:39, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:21, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
No evidence of self-work. Uploader's other self-work uploads are clearly copyvios. Unknown COM:TOO in Turkey so I believe we need to assume it's non-free unless someone can provide info on TOO in Turkey. Nick (talk) 16:38, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:24, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
A stamp of Poland. Unclear copyright situation. See Polish stamps are copyrighted 31.174.20.244 09:53, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:13, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
A stamp of Poland. Unclear copyright situation. See Polish stamps are copyrighted 31.174.20.244 09:53, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:13, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
A stamp of Poland. Unclear copyright situation. See Polish stamps are copyrighted 31.174.20.244 09:54, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:13, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
A stamp of Poland. Unclear copyright situation. See Polish stamps are copyrighted 31.174.20.244 09:55, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:13, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Promotional userpage - serves no purpose other than trying to promote this person Gbawden (talk) 10:04, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:13, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
No FoP in Latvia Edgars2007 (talk) 13:00, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:14, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Nominal G7, This appears to only be linked with an abandoned Wiki-radio project Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:45, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:14, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
bad quality of the photo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bukk (talk • contribs) 2016-05-26T10:46:14 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:15, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
hoax, most probably mady by a child called Jordi who likes to enter a fancy page with fancy images Erik Wannee (talk) 17:41, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Nope, we're trying to create our own "Micro"nation and that isn't a joke.
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:16, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
hoax, most probably mady by a child called Jordi who likes to enter a fancy page with fancy images Erik Wannee (talk) 17:42, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Nope, we're trying to create our own "Micro"nation and that isn't a joke.
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:16, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope (not realistically useful for an educational purpose). Homemade logo for own use by Wikipedia user. EvilFreD overleg 20:20, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- While the image serves no educational purpose, according to Commons:Project scope a user is allowed to upload a small number of images for use on his/her own userpage. Due to restricted internet access the creator isn't able to upload anything directly to commons and had asked if the image could be transferred to commons as the user wanted to use the image on his user page on other projects besides enwiki. And not all Wikimedia Projects allow local upload (like the home project of the creator: nlwiki). If I read Commons:Project_scope#File_in_use_in_another_Wikimedia_project I would say the image falls in scope as it's the only image made by Oxygene7-13 that is uploaded to commons and it's used on a Wikimedia Project (even if it's in user namespace). Mbch331 (talk) 20:36, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Project Scope allows for a small number of images for use on userpages (like a photograph of yourself) to be uploaded to Commons, but not "artwork without obvious educational use" and "advertising or self-promotion". EvilFreD overleg 06:47, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Kept: In use. --INeverCry 22:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
File:Make-up artist Thenia Afentoulidou prepares model Chrysanthi Lykousi for cosplay photoshoot with two photographers 1.JPG
[edit]
See OTRS 2016052410018157 from Thenia Afentoulidou - this person use my name and my photo without my permission Ronhjones (Talk) 21:54, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
File:Make-up artist Thenia Afentoulidou prepares model Sofia Koutsouveli for cosplay photoshoot with two photographers.JPG
[edit]
See OTRS 2016052410018157 from Thenia Afentoulidou - this person use my name and my photo without my permission Ronhjones (Talk) 21:54, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
File:Make-up artist Thenia Afentoulidou prepares model Chrysanthi Lykousi for cosplay photoshoot with two photographers 2.JPG
[edit]
See OTRS 2016052410018157 from Thenia Afentoulidou - this person use my name and my photo without my permission Ronhjones (Talk) 21:54, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:17, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Violation of Personality Rights: The depicted persons so obviously indicate by their gestures that they do not want to be photographed. Doing this in spite and publishing this image on a world wide platform breaches their right and is highly unethical on top of that. Wuselig (talk) 00:03, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello User: Wuselig I did not intend to bring the rights of these young women by publishing the pictures.- CF: Droit à l'image. The right image is understood to recognizable people, what is not clear in this photo. Best regards.--Pierre André (talk) 08:29, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Pierre André. Recognicability goes well beyond the visibility of the face. Recognicability can be any feature by which people familiar with a person can recognize that person. But what struck me more in this image, is that these women obviously didn't want to be photographed, but you did it nevertheless. No beyond that breach of trust, you even published that photo. I actually am an inclusionist and am very reluctant in posting deletion requests. But I did want to put the issue of the breach of personality rights in this case up for discussion with the community.--Wuselig (talk) 09:58, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello User: Wuselig You are right. -That the faces of these women wanted obviously not be photographed, is a fact. I have other pictures (strictly personal) on which they are perfectly identifiable. In my mind, this was the answer "challenge" and especially not commit a breach of trust. Sorry.- Best regards.- --Pierre André (talk) 10:27, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello Pierre André. Recognicability goes well beyond the visibility of the face. Recognicability can be any feature by which people familiar with a person can recognize that person. But what struck me more in this image, is that these women obviously didn't want to be photographed, but you did it nevertheless. No beyond that breach of trust, you even published that photo. I actually am an inclusionist and am very reluctant in posting deletion requests. But I did want to put the issue of the breach of personality rights in this case up for discussion with the community.--Wuselig (talk) 09:58, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 22:18, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Masum-al-hasan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Jianhui67 talk★contribs 15:09, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Not PD, and have no legal permission or license. Even uploaded in not the original photographer. ~ Moheen (talk) 22:16, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted - Jcb (talk) 16:17, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Masum-al-hasan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Not own work. Seems copyvio. No permission.
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
~ Moheen (keep talking) 04:05, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
- Disagree Content on the site is licensed under Creative Commons Licence.--Masum-al-Hasan (talk) 04:05, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
- NonCommercial and NoDerivatives are not allowed licenses on commons --Hystrix (talk) 21:10, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 21:11, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kostiantyn Zbrozhek (talk · contribs)
[edit]Diploma of participant or a laureate of art exhibitions are definitely not "own work" of uploader (unless they are fake and thus out of scope anyway). Couple of them still could be possibly corrected to {{PD-text}}, marking the organizing committees as "authors/copyright owners" - if it allows letter logo in one case and slightly visible anchor watermark in another...
- File:Диплом, лауреат конкурса Алмазный Дюк.jpg
- File:Диплом, художник года, народное признание.jpg
- File:Диплом мастера Акварели.jpg
- File:Сертификат участника бельгийского салона акварели, апрель май 2005.jpg
- File:Грамота участника выставки Маринисты Одессы - дню святого Николая.jpg
- Данный файл соответствует {{PD-text}} на текст и оформление, и {{PD-UA-exempt}} на печать. С уважением, Dogad75 (talk) 13:35, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Tatewaki (talk) 00:19, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Dogad75, с текстом и печатью проблем нет, естественно - я не уверен, можно ли обойти слегка видимый якорь в качестве фона этого бланка. Вряд ли он шрифтовой (не помню в знакомых мне, да и детализация явно выше таких символов), разве что посчитать de minimis. Tatewaki (talk) 22:13, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
- Честно говоря, я его даже не заметил. «...de minimis...» — да чёрт его знает, это так всё субъективно, одни могут посчитать, другие — нет. Всё зависит от админа, подводящего итог. С уважением, --Dogad75 (talk) 09:19, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- Dogad75, с текстом и печатью проблем нет, естественно - я не уверен, можно ли обойти слегка видимый якорь в качестве фона этого бланка. Вряд ли он шрифтовой (не помню в знакомых мне, да и детализация явно выше таких символов), разве что посчитать de minimis. Tatewaki (talk) 22:13, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: all of them are above TOO. --Jcb (talk) 20:32, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Pocketthis as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: This was uploaded for all the wrong reasons. I also removed a drug commercial in here from a foreign site,and now the up-loader has reverted me . Not eligible for Speedy and dubiuos reason provided for deletion. Nominator previously blocked Amitie 10g (talk) 22:38, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
- Any admin that clicks on his girlfriend's website link, and ends up on a site for a Minoxidil commercial in who knows what language (looks Islamic), will delete this photo, which the uploader actually had the nerve to try and stick into the Chevy Silverado article on En.Wikipedia. Yes, I've been blocked by an admin here for defending my files, and I'm proud of it. This man actually has rights here. He is obviously going through some mental disorder, and should have his rights revoked, and a good Banning for a while might do him good as well. This photo has trouble written all over it, and any rational editor will agree with me. I have no idea why an editor with rights here, that has been here as long as he has, would be pulling this nonsense, unless someone else is using his computer perhaps??
Or like I said previously, he is going through some mental difficulty, and needs help.Pocketthis (talk) 22:56, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, an Admin will delete this file, but apparently does't meet the COM:CSD, according to Commons:Deletion policy. This file may also be outside the Project scope, but you should provide valid (or at least stronger) reason. --Amitie 10g (talk) 00:11, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- Sir, you have posted a photo of half of a truck, with some woman in front of it. In the description, you added a website link to her supposed website, which actually turns out to be a commercial or text about the drug Minoxidil.
Wikipedia is not a self promotion vehicle for your model friend, or for a drug commercial, or any commercial promotional venture. Then, someone had to revert your attempt to try and stick this garbage in the Chevy Silverado article. I am SHOCKED that you have been here for years, you have special rights here, and you do this outrageous editing. Then....the best excuse you could come up with why it shouldn't be deleted, is because I was blocked from here once last year. You sir, are in need of some psychiatric help, and I hope you get it before you do some real damage here. Good luckPocketthis (talk) 00:48, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- I just noticed that someone else has now tried to post this in Silverado. Then I looked at the actual description, and this isn't even "your" photo. For what reason are you trying to save it? It's a commercial!!, and of no value whatsoever-Pocketthis (talk) 02:18, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- This is the link I removed from the photo's description: Visit www.KathyJean.net for complete information.
Why don't you go to that link, and see where you end up? You may change your mind about not wanting to delete this garbage. Good evening-Pocketthis (talk) 02:45, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- I was checking my watchlist when I saw a reversion in the Chevy Silverado page. I noticed that a non-registered user had deleted this photo with a genuine and long explanation. I visited the photo's description page and saw a link in the description for the Author's model, or the author herself. I clicked on it, and ended up in Islam, then to Google translate to see what it said. It turned out to be a Minoxidil commercial. I then realized the truck in the photo was hardly seen, and the model was really the subject. That, along with the commercial, prompted me to ask for a speedy deletion. Then, instantly Amitie 10g reverted my request. I jumped the gun, and assumed it was his photo. That's what this mess is all about here. The truth is, that link in the photo could have been added by a vandal for all I know. I apologize to my revert-er, for assuming it was his photo, however, for the life of me, I have no idea what use this photo is......bad link or not. I'm sure you guys will do the right thing here, and make the right decision. In the meantime, I've just reverted it out of Chevy Silverado myself this time. I think the one's posting this photo in the truck gallery are in love with this model. This is an encyclopedia gentlemen. ThanksPocketthis (talk) 03:19, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- KEEP - I added this photo to the Wikipedia article Chevrolet Silverado over a year ago, with a rationale. It was posted to a gallery of "special use" Silverado vehicles, which includes photos of utility, police, and recreational vehicles. In this case, this photo was used to show an amateur model posing in front of the vehicle. If the link to the source of photo has changed over time, that's not our concern; copyright WAS granted to the Commons when the photo was originally uploaded. Again, this photo has been posted for a very long time, to a very popular Wiki article. The photo remained on that article, and has never been deleted, until user Pocketthis--and some IP editor--removed it yesterday, probably to support this deletion claim. What specific part of the DELETION POLICY is this photo violating? Magnolia677 (talk) 10:20, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- Keep: Not particularly high-quality, but nonetheless arguably COM:SCOPE, and currently COM:INUSE, as it's in use in good faith at en:Chevrolet Silverado (though Pocketthis has attempted to removed it there also). No spam links on the page, though the uploader's user page has an expired domain that a squatter took; but that doesn't affect the file's status. To wit:
- There is no link to any spam on the photograph or its description page. I assume that Pocketthis (talk · contribs) talk about weird web pages has something to do with the (old) web address that appears on User:KathyJean. She hasn't been on Commons since August 2013. In the meantime, her domain name apparently expired, and on in March 2015 was re-registered by a domain squatter: Those are scammers who re-register old domain names so and then put spam on them so that victims see the advertising when they try to go to an old website. This is a plague that affects just about any defunct website on the Internet. If the defunct domain name should be removed, that is one thing: But it is not the uploader's own website anymore, and is not her fault, other than that she let her domain expire.
- Some images are uploaded by people for their own benefit, but it can also meet COM:SCOPE, in that it is useful for an educational purpose. Also, it's COM:INUSE on another Wikimedia project, which means it's automatically considered to be in scope; the user who put it to use is even here defending it, as you've noticed from your own when you removed it there.
- @Pocketthis: en:Wikipedia:No personal attacks applies to Commons also. I know you have heard of this because you have brought up to other users on English Wikipedia before. The admin that you accuse did you a favor by nominating the file for deletion discussion, when you should have been able to do it yourself once you saw that it was controversial. You have now accused both that admin, and an unrelated user on the other side of the planet, of both having the same girlfriend. Do you think that everyone who disagrees with you is corrupt and in love with someone who used Commons for 4 days in 2013? (For anyone interested in the answer to that: This user's previous interaction with admins and other users on Commons as well as talk history on English Wikipedia speaks for itself.) --Closeapple (talk) 19:20, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
- How nice. Turn this mess around on Pocketthis here on Commons. I love this place. The 2 reasons I offered up this "photo" for deletion, was that it is a photo of a model, not a truck, and you know it. The truck is hardly in the picture. What is the "special use".....hauling models around? This is a self interest photo of a woman called "an actress, Model", that she posted herself, with a link to her supposed "model site", and somehow, it found its way to Chevy Silverado. People here constanly ignore the fact that this is an encyclopedia, not a place to view models on a truck page for the "good ole boys". Put the photo in the amateur model's article (if there is one). That's where it would belong in my opinion. I have already apologized to Amitie 10g for screwing up here, and thinking this was his photo, simply because he reverted my request for deletion. However, I really have an issue with him, when his excuse for not allowing my deletion request, was that I was blocked from here once in the past. That really sucked on his part. The best of us have been blocked from somewhere on this site for standing up for what we believe in. I was never a vandal, so that wasn't very professional of him, nor kind of him either.
Number 2: When I clicked on her link (the one I since removed), it took me to Islam. For all I knew, this was a means of a "terrorist communication", so when I added the two facts up, it equaled "Trouble". The real problem here is Commons policies. NO ONE should be allowed in any photo file except the up-loader, and an Admin.....PERIOD. Even if it wasn't a wiki vandal, but a website hijacker, she shouldn't have had a self promotion link in the photo taking you to her website in the first place. How did she get away with that? The reason I was blocked from commons for 3 months last year, was because I was screaming about photo vandalism in my files. I would do it all over again. These photos here are "works of art", and not data files for vandals to edit in commercials or cuss words, or anything that implies the author of the photo has anything to do with these edits. Until that policy is fixed, I'll never up-load another photo to this site. As far as this truck "thing". Now that I realize it was a vandal's work, and I've removed it, I could care less what article this "thing" shows up on. Enjoy your photo.-Pocketthis (talk) 17:05, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, but all your arguments are not a valid reason for deleting. The file is currently in use and is inside the scope of the Chevrolet Silverado, not anything else; anything with drugs or elewhere is irrelevant. So, stop your disruptive editions (specially in Chevrolet Silverado) and stop insulting users in the WMF projects; elsewhere, I'll report you to the Administrator's Noticeboard in the both Commons and Wikipedia. --Amitie 10g (talk) 19:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
- Also, the most licenses allowed in Commons allows to users to edit any page in almost any namespace. So, it is not problem of Commons policies, it's licensing. So, you can't questionate the Commons Policies without know them (specially Project Scope and Commons is not censored). --Amitie 10g (talk) 19:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
- Pocketthis, I find your tone to be confrontational and your actions disruptive. Please stop. If you don't like the policies on Wikipedia or the Commons, then try to reach consensus to change them, or find some other place to volunteer your time. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 01:02, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Kept: yes it is a poor quality picture, and really, the focus is clearly not the truck. Despite that, there is some educational value and it is in use (although its use at en:wp is questionable, but that is not for discussion here). P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:37, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Promotional image, see link to facebook account. If Kathy Jean is being pictured in this image - she's not the photographer - as this is not a selfie. This has survived prior deletion nominations but as it is not in use, and clearly promotional I'd request another look. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:21, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: Wider concensus and stronger comments resulted in the previous DR resolved as Kept. I still don't see valid reasons for deletion, even if the file is not longer used (but still categorized under five categories). --Amitie 10g (talk) 05:36, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Info: Now the file is in use, making the reasoning on this DR invalid. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:26, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 20:34, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Unclear whether the uploader is the person who made the sculpture or just the photo. Kelly (talk) 19:27, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Useful. ~ Moheen (talk) 20:46, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:36, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Official coat of arms, not free (see http://www.cittametropolitana.ct.it, Commons:Deletion requests/Italian CoA) GJo (talk) 21:33, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Il file stemma 3x4 è una realizzazione originale e non viola nessuna licenza che resta sempre a capo del proprietario, cioè la Città Metropolitana di Catania. Eventuali utilizzatori dell'immagine possono farlo, trattandosi di uno stemma Istituzionale previa autorizzazione dell'Ente proprietario.
31.05.2016 Non so bene come funziona il sistema Commons. Qualcuno sa dirmi cosa succede dopo che qualcuno ha segnalato un tuo file? Quanto tempo dura l'istruttoria per decider se rimuoverlo o accettarlo? Chi è che accetta oppure cancella? Grazie
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:37, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
This file is outdated version of File:Bala Türkvizyon 2015 map.svg. File not used. Created separetly for unknown reason. Author of this file is KingDriverFC. He also contributes at original SVG file (see history of both files). ← Aléxi̱s Spoudaíos talkrus? 06:47, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- File:ESC 2014 Map.png
- For same reason (outdated of File:ESC 2014 Map.svg). ← Aléxi̱s Spoudaíos talkrus? 07:18, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Oh, Jesus. I find more duplicate (some is outdated) files of SVG version maps of Eurovision Song Contest. The SVG version of Maps used in more articles of Wikipedia as default. Many PNG maps is uploads by New users and no used in articles. I don't know. Is it right if I put it there?
- File:ESC 1956 Map.png
- File:ESC 1957 Map.png
- File:ESC 1997 Map.png
- File:ESC 1998 Map.png
- File:ESC 2009 Map.png
- File:ESC 2010 Map.png
- File:ESC 2011 Map.png
- File:ESC 2012 Map.png
- File:ESC 2014 Map.png
- File:ESC 2016 Map.png
- File:ESC 2017 Map.png
- File:JESC 2011 Map.png
- File:JESC 2012 Map.png
- File:JESC 2016 Map.png
- File:Magic Circus Show 2010 Map.png (duplicate and outdated of File:EMCS 2010 Map.svg)
- File:Magic Circus Show 2011 Map.png (duplicate and outdated of File:EMCS 2011 Map.svg)
- File:Intervision 1977 Map.png
- File:Intervision 1978 Map.png
- File:Intervision 1978 Map.png
- File:Intervision 1980 Map.png
You can view only basic nomination (Bala Türkvizyon 2015 map1.png). This duplicates you can ignore. ← Aléxi̱s Spoudaíos talkrus? 07:36, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, with the note that none of the duplicated files was in use. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:43, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Files of User:NYBCchimps
[edit]- File:Blood center gala.jpg - reverse image search in Google finds this everywhere
- File:Milstein3.jpg - same with this one
I did not check all of this person's files but many of them are circulating around the Internet in places that seem to be controlled by different people. The upload quality is low, and I think these are Internet grabs by a new user who might not know Common's copyright policies. I think they should all be deleted pending clarification. -- Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:01, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Note that File:Blood center gala.jpg has
FBMDEXIF, meaning that it comes from Facebook. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:21, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Many of the photos that you are concerned about were taken by people I know personally, I can get permission from them. The photos of the chimpanzees I admit I did just take from news articles. I could possibly get permission for them but it would take longer. I apologize. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NYBCchimps (talk • contribs) 13:35, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
- Hello, thanks. Please, no need to apologize, it is confusing. Here is the email release process which the photographers and copyright holders would have to make. Commons:Email_templates#Declaration_of_consent_for_all_inquiries It is confusing! If you have questions, ask at Commons:Upload_help. Blue Rasberry (talk) 11:52, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
- Many of the photos that you are concerned about were taken by people I know personally, I can get permission from them. The photos of the chimpanzees I admit I did just take from news articles. I could possibly get permission for them but it would take longer. I apologize. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NYBCchimps (talk • contribs) 13:35, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:44, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
Unclear whether the original uploader is the copyright holder of the file. Kelly (talk) 10:39, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- Is there any reason to doubt ? The file is complete with metadata, which says photo was taken on 2 May, 2007, upload is from two weeks later. Seems legit. Esprit Fugace (talk) 16:17, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
- It's the user's sole photo contribution and they never declared that they were themselves the photographer. Kelly (talk) 16:38, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Kept: per Esprit Fugace. --INeverCry 19:09, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
This picture in this file is wrong, I changed the image with the official Riosas's "logo" and I dont want this image appear in google image search: Author: Riosas Council Alvaroggallardo (talk) 14:58, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
He entrado en la página del Ayuntamiento de Riosa y el escudo oficial sigue siendo el mismo, es decir, los elementos que lo forman son los que figuran en esta representación.
La descripción del escudo de Riosa es la siguiente: "Escudo cortado en dos. El primer cuartel, representa sobre campo de azur, la Cruz de los Ángeles, en clara referencia a su dependencia obispal durante siglos. El segundo cuartel, nos enseña unas montañas que representan la sierra del Aramo, accidente geográfico que tanto significa para el concejo. Al timbre corona real, cerrada." Descripción que se ajusta completamente al escudo representado, objeto de esta discusión. Si lo que no le gusta son las cargas, hay una versión anterior del escudo, sin cargas. Si tiene un diseño mejor, ruego que lo comparta con todos nosotros, eso enriquece este portal, en otro caso, creo que la petición de borrado es una opción extrema que no se ajusta a lo que más conviene.
Quizás no nos guste el diseño del escudo, pero esto es una opción personal, por lo que debemos ajustarnos a la versión que usa dicho Ayuntamiento, teniendo en cuenta que las cargas no forman parte del escudo.
Para evitar problemas, creo que lo mejor es poner el escudo sin cargas.
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 19:09, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
