Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2016/08/24

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 August 24th, 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.

Why not keep the nice properly attributed copy from the Imperial War Museum, instead of the lousy photocopy from a book, that we attributed to someone on a copyright website saying that it's a copy from a book (from the IWM).

We can even crop the decent copy back down if someone really wants. Reventtalk 00:34, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Nick (talk) 14:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 00:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Nick (talk) 14:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Sorry, I was wrong when I upload that file. I mistook the date when it was made with the date of death of its author. I have checked the death date and it isn't in public domain. Excuse me. Ivanhercaz | Discusión 00:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Thanks to user for such honesty. --Nick (talk) 14:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete photocopied misattribute copy, keep File:The Royal Navy during the Second World War A9221.jpg the nice, properly attributed copy. Once again, Robert Hurst, at the source website, actually says this is an IWM photo, and gives the photo number.

Crop the decent version back down if you really want.

BTW, it's not a US Navy photo either. Reventtalk 01:15, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Nick (talk) 14:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Was attributed to Robert Hurst, and licensed as US Navy. Both obviously wrong. The file page description is from Hurst, but I found a better copy. This is probably an RAF photo of this ship, and one of a substantial number of IWM photos that have not yet been scanned.

Absolutely no evidence of copyright status, unless we go back to making stuff up. Reventtalk 02:09, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, should be deleted... good photo but no evidence of source or licence. sad. Rcbutcher (talk) 04:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Nick (talk) 14:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


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

Delete the photocopied crud in place of the actual photo I just uploaded, with the right attribution, to replace it with (it's neither by Hurst nor a US Navy photo, Hurst actually points at the specific IWM image I just uploaded). Reventtalk 02:30, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Nick (talk) 14:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No source or author listed. Most likely (and only possible found) source is http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/168.htm where it is listed as an "Undated postcard, drydock location unknown." and "Contributed by © Richard Leonhardt"

All we know is it's from sometime between 1919 and 1940. No evidence, at all, that this is PD or a US Navy photo. Reventtalk 10:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Nick (talk) 14:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Possible copyrighted image. Robert Hurst is neither a sailor or employeee of the U.S Navy. As with the other images attributed to him on Commons, he only uploaded the image to the website. Wikicology (talk) 10:45, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The Naval History and Heritage Command website, an official U.S. Navy website, considers that this photograph is in the public domain, per [1] and [2]. Assuming they're right, the file could be kept or it could be replaced with one of the larger versions from that website. -- Asclepias (talk) 13:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep The source here is crap, but I'm (right now) downloading the full-res from NHHC to replace this with. Will edit the page after. Reventtalk

Kept: image copyright issue resolved. --Nick (talk) 13:44, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Possible copyrighted image. Robert Hurst is neither a sailor or employeee of the U.S Navy. As with the other images attributed to him on Commons, he only uploaded the image to the website. Wikicology (talk) 10:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: image copyright issue resolved. --Nick (talk) 14:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Possible copyrighted image. Robert Hurst is neither a sailor nor employeee of the U.S Navy. As with the other images attributed to him on Commons, he only uploaded the image to the website. Wikicology (talk) 10:47, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: image copyright issue resolved. --Nick (talk) 14:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Possible copyrighted image. Robert Hurst is neither a sailor nor employeee of the U.S Navy. As with the other images attributed to him on Commons, he only uploaded the image to the website. Wikicology (talk) 10:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Per nom. We have information on plenty of images of this ship, and no indication of the provenance of this particular one. Needs to go away unless we can find some indication. Reventtalk 12:57, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Nick (talk) 14:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete in favor of File:HMS Georgetown, British Town Class destroyer. 15 April 1942, Greenock A8331.jpg, a better copy from the IWM without completely incorrect attribution and license. Reventtalk 10:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Nick (talk) 14:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Quite likely PD, but... no author, source does not give any attribution, and calling it a US Navy image is completely made up. We have no actual idea, and other images of this ship (from the same refit, even) from both the USN and IWM. Reventtalk 11:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Nick (talk) 14:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unfortunately. Source doesn't give any attribution or indication of licensing. Quite likely PD, but we'd be completely guessing at any licensing. Reventtalk 12:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Nick (talk) 14:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/tribun/fiches_id/303108.asp COPYVIO Benoît Prieur (d) 13:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyvio. --Thibaut120094 (talk) 13:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

http://www.lamontagne.fr/auvergne/actualite/departement/haute-loire/2014/10/27/gerard-roche-donne-sa-version-de-la-bete-du-gevaudan_11197166.html COPYVIO Benoît Prieur (d) 13:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Thibaut120094 (talk) 13:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

http://www.my-angers.info/01/20/reaction-virulente-de-paul-jeanneteau-depute-suite-a-la-demission-de-jean-claude-antonini/11349 COPYVIO Benoît Prieur (d) 13:40, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Thibaut120094 (talk) 13:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Jessicawilson2 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

This looks like a lot of Flickrwashing, either by a fan or by a reckless promoter (User:Jessicawilson2 was banned as a promotional sockpuppet on Wikipedia last year). File:CK Morgan (Photoshoot Pics).jpg and similar shots are credited to Andreas Genz in the metadata ("Copyright: FOTO-GENZ www.Foto-Genz.de"), File:Mc Galaxy (Session).JPG is watermarked "Emecheal Pictures". Images were uploaded to Flickr the same day they were added to Commons.

McGeddon (talk) 11:12, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:21, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Jessicawilson2 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

These must have been below the fold when I filed Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Jessicawilson2. Per the other request, these all look Flickrwashed, being uploaded to Flickr the same day as to Commons. File:Eddie Watson Arrives at Vodafone GhanaMusic Awards jpg.jpg is plainly watermarked to "ghanagist.com".

McGeddon (talk) 11:09, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyvios. --INeverCry 17:26, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Bad manipulation, the copyright is not mine can you delete it I don't know how to do it. Maximekarlen (talk) 15:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Jcb: Copyright violation: Not "Own work". Exact copy of http://republic.pink/images/2/9/8/1/5/5/1/en/1-michael-brooks-basketball.jpg

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

Based on the linked article this item is not crown copyright ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 22:19, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Asked to close early, because of the subject matter. The British Free was not 'British", but instead an unit of the Waffen SS. German law gives a term of 70 years pma, so the (uncertain) author would have to have died in very close proximity to the time of publication. No apparent evidence. --Reventtalk 22:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Test File Delete Workcastmr (talk) 17:34, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:31, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Loren machlev (talk · contribs)

[edit]

fond on lot of pages http://tineye.com/search/3e25a1d43dbe02eccb4b00dad737d9fbef729d6b/?sort=size&order=desc

Framawiki (talk) 19:03, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: clear copyright violation. --JuTa 01:43, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

degraded-quality duplicate of File:Марк Бурно.jpg DmitTrix (talk) 20:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talkcontribs 06:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Gladstwo (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Batch of politican copyvios nominated here instead of speedy due to volume. File:Lord Paddick.jpg is here, File:Lynne Featherstone.jpg is here, etc. See http://www.libdems.org.uk/people

Эlcobbola talk 16:29, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello elcobbola! This is part of the Liberal History editathon at the National Liberal Club. A staff member from the Liberal Democrat press team has released these photos, which the Liberal Democrats hold the copyright to, under an open licence as part of improving articles on historical and current politicians of the liberal tradition. These images are openly licensed, and there are many "long term Wikimedians" here who can vouch for them, but we can go through the OTRS approval process if you would like. Would you prefer that? Richard Symonds (talk) 16:33, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is required per COM:OTRS. Эlcobbola talk 16:35, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your kind and considerate reply :-) Richard Symonds (talk) 16:40, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Notwithstanding that the technical and aesthetic characteristics of the images suggest multiple authors (i.e., the "own work" claim by Gladstwo is patently false - and a "staff member" is not the copyright holder), the CC license is contradicted by metadata (e.g. "All rights reserved. +44(0)7776061973" on File:Chris Rennard.jpg and many others) and by sites on which the images were published prior to upload here. As someone with more than 47,000 edits to the Commons, I would expect you to be aware that "vouch[ing] for them" is inadequate. This situation is explained at COM:OTRS; COM:L and COM:EVID are also relevant. Perhaps crediting and supporting these images properly would be a better use of time than sarcasm. Эlcobbola talk 16:55, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't sarcasm - I was genuinely trying to be polite! I'm not really aware of Commons rules, it's all a bit complex and harsh for me - I prefer the wilds of Wikidata ;-). In any case, many thanks again for your reply - the email will be sent tonight from a parliament.uk account and we will update the images with the ticket number when it's done. Richard Symonds (talk) 17:08, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Although File:Dominic Addington.png should be removed, it was a mistaken upload. Richard Symonds (talk) 17:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, my apologies. I can process the ticket if you let me know when it has been submitted. Эlcobbola talk 17:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: OTRS permission recieved and confirmed. --Josve05a (talk) 10:11, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

quality too bad to have encyclopedic value DmitTrix (talk) 20:47, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Jcb: Copyright violation: Image from the Russian book "Психотерапевтическая помощь людям сложного характера" by Гоголевич Т. Е. (see here: http://www.medpsy.ru/climp/2014_1_3/article10.php)

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

Unused personal photo, out of scope C messier (talk) 09:41, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Wdwd: Out of project scope

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

A pedido del autor EMans (talk) 01:07, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Author request. --Cambalachero (talk) 16:01, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Rennato Ferreiiraa (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unused personal photos, out of scope

Mjrmtg (talk) 00:42, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 22:31, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

mediocre (bad focus) quality and redundant for the category Skateboards. Not used. No other contributions from uploader. DavidIvar (talk) 00:05, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:14, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Private image of non notable individual. Not used. No other contributions from uploader. DavidIvar (talk) 00:10, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:15, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Private image of non notable individual. Not used. No other useful contributions from uploader. DavidIvar (talk) 00:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:15, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: "Artwork" of unidentified significance. Takeaway (talk) 23:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:14, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

failed image Arnaud Palastowicz (talk) 23:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:14, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, low quality, personal photo, out of scope C messier (talk) 09:34, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:12, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal photo, out of scope C messier (talk) 09:40, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:12, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused personal photo, out of scope C messier (talk) 09:41, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:11, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal photo, out of scope C messier (talk) 09:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:11, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Private image of non notable individual. Not used. No other useful contributions from uploader. DavidIvar (talk) 00:13, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:15, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Gayo Chaggaka (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unused personal photos, out of scope

Mjrmtg (talk) 00:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:15, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file is poor quality and so it is not educationally useful. 掬茶 (talk) 02:05, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:15, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looks to be scanned from a printed source. Flickr source states that it was taken in 1955; cannot be PD due to age, and Flickr license is unlikely to be correct. Carl Lindberg (talk) 02:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:15, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of project scope Didym (talk) 02:57, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:15, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

unlikely to be own work Didym (talk) 02:59, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:15, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Previously published at numerous other sites, e.g., http://www.coveralia.com/fotos/alika-y-nueva-alianza78794.php --ghouston (talk) 03:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:15, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Rosne RastaMan (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Seems like various album covers, unlikely to be own work.

--ghouston (talk) 03:13, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:16, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of project scope Didym (talk) 03:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:16, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Very poor quality map, entirely surpassed and replaced by File:Corporal punishment in Europe.svg. Turnless (talk) 05:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:16, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Pointless file. Unused and very poor quality. Turnless (talk) 06:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:16, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

These are all copyrighted logos Sunnya343 (talk) 06:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:16, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Yweplay (talk · contribs)

[edit]

These seem to be typical "bucket shop" heraldry (Heraldic fraud). Even if these weren’t fraudulent, there’s still no indication that these were released under a free license.

Tom-L (talk) 07:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:16, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Volanick2 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Small size, no EXIF, most probably not own work.

Yann (talk) 10:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 18:57, 3 March 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.

Files uploaded by Volanick2 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

High wiki use. Unclear copyright status, both files uploaded by Volanick2 (talk · contributions · Statistics) with an extensive, questionable upload behaviour. File:Arenadabaixada2.jpg (high res 4320x3240px, exif available, uploaded on 04.06.2014, showing the Brazilian stadium en:Arena da Baixada, used for FIFA World Cup 2014) is sourced with a direct link to a Russian photo hoster, given copyright credits to "Gustavo Paolo". Licensed with {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} --> on which base?. http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9651/185808115.20/0_e68d8_4635a199_XXL.jpg (last modified: 02.06.2014) itself is a low res 1024x768px image without exif infos and can't be the source. The same file - now identical as available at fotki - was uploaded 1 day earlier = File:0 e68d8 4635a199 XXL.jpg, given also the copyright credits to "Gustavo Paolo", here licensed contradictionary as "own work" via self-{{Cc-zero}}. Note that the uploader Volanick2 is known as "(Tiago) Volanick". Even considering that at Fotki the same 1024x768px file contains the exif-infos (= http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9651/185808115.20/0_e68d8_4635a199_orig.jpg, just change "_XXL" to "_orig" for retrieving the original version) it remains unclear from where the uploader got the high res version and the infos about the author and license as {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} (or self-{{Cc-zero}}).

It might be that the file was taken originally somewhere from http://www.copa2014.gov.br, e.g. http://www.copa2014.gov.br/pt-br/sedes/curitiba (official Brazilian portal of FIFA World Cup 2014, with some content licensed as {{Cc-by-3.0-br}}) but further details are needed to verify the copyright status.

Gunnex (talk) 12:45, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File originally posted on skyscrapercity.com by Gustavo Paolo _ I contacted him on Private message there and sent him the link to this page. Hans. 23:44, 17 June 2014 UTC — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.186.210.90 (talk • contribs)

Gustavo Paolo here! Tiago Volanick contacted me through Skyscrapercity private message, asking for a high resolution version of that picture, I gave him by e-mail the original .rw2 that was generated from my camera that day. I`m not a user of Wikipedia, but I allow complete use of this file, if the WIkipedia community so desires... 17/June, 2014 (21:44)

(21:46) Gustavo Paolo's email: e.sazhe@ya.ru — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.101.64.41 (talk • contribs)

Hi! Thanks for you comments. With these I could identify the related fotki-user "e-sazhe". The image is available via http://fotki.yandex.ru/users/e-sazhe/?&p=13 = http://fotki.yandex.ru/next/users/e-sazhe/album/425960/view/944344 = (as indicated by uploader) http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9651/185808115.20/0_e68d8_4635a199_orig and it was posted on 02.06.2014 by "Gustavo_Paolo" via http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=114529140&postcount=1080.
@189.101.64.41: (Gustavo Paolo): We need a written permission from you. Please send an email from e.sazhe@ya.ru to COM:OTRS = permissions-commons@wikimedia.org confirming that you are releasing both files under a {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}-license. Preferably, you may use the email-template available at COM:OTRS#Declaration of consent for all enquiries. If everything checks out the files will be tagged by OTRS-team with an "OTRS-ticket" confirming the license infos. In the meantime I tagged the files with OTRS pending. Gunnex (talk) 07:45, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OTRS permission for public domain release of the image received and info added into files. I think, the low-res image can be deleted as duplicate. Ankry (talk) 09:12, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved -FASTILY 17:40, 24 June 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.

Files uploaded by Volanick2 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent (Facebook) resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Volanick2 (ex-1-month blocked serial copyright violator [see also the last 2 entries on his talk page], most likely a sock of Volanick1 (talk · contributions · Statistics) with similar deleted images). File:Panoramicatoledo.jpg (aerial image of Brazilian municipality pt:Toledo (Paraná)), uploaded 12.2014, already circualting since 2013 on Facebook via https://www.facebook.com/aeroclique/photos/a.769783296369057.1073741827.769779026369484/818835761463810/?type=3&theater (© by "Aeroclique Foto Aérea", taken from this album full of aerial shots)). File:PanoramicaToledo.jpg is a most likely a reupload, 1stly uploaded by sock Volanick1 with source = Panoramio (and most likely later posted on skyscraper/photobucket).

Ignoring false claim of authorship/license/etc. of File:Bandeira Toledo PR.jpg (flag of the related municipality), derived from the official coat of arms designed by "Arcinoé Antonio Peixoto de Faria" in 1972, in PD by other means...

Gunnex (talk) 23:18, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:36, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Volanick2 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Volanick2 (serial copyright violator, sock pupperty, Panoramio/Facebook/etc, grabber). File:Toledoparcial.JPG = reupload per above (see exif of http://i58.tinypic.com/mjwahi.jpg). Uploaded on 26.03.2016.

Gunnex (talk) 07:16, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:16, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by RIMON.81 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unused selfies

Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 07:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by RIMON.81 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

nonsense selfies

Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 07:26, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:16, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of project scope: The image is not very useful, is unused, and the licensing model looks like a advertising technique. Lacrymocéphale (talk) 07:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of scope, vacation pics that a way --> Facebook Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 07:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

File EXIF shows "Copyright holder Henry Arvidsson". MKFI (talk) 08:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Prosperousbabysitter (talk · contribs)

[edit]

File EXIF shows "Copyright holder Henry Arvidsson".

MKFI (talk) 08:06, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Watermarked carriagehope.org, copyright violation. MKFI (talk) 08:16, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Kmr ashish (talk · contribs)

[edit]

available in news media sites with different credits: [3], [4] and they typically credit correctly.

SpacemanSpiff 08:21, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyvio. Low-resolution image, probably ripped from a website. This image occurs in several variants on the WWW, and seems to be (c) Real Madrid. Henxter (talk) 08:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Lower resolution of this (correctly named and referenced) file. Gyrostat (talk) 13:46, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:58, 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.

Uncategorised and unreferenced duplicate of File:SSG Desiree Palacios makes final settings on her camera before a sortie in a F-16D Fighting Falcon.jpg + previous deletion requests Gyrostat (talk) 09:13, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file is of my creation, and now, I was no longer of any use, so I would like it removed. Belpois30 (talk) 09:45, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

self promotion Cabayi (talk) 10:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Possible copyrighted image. Robert Hurst is neither a sailor nor employeee of the U.S Navy. As with the other images attributed to him on Commons, he only uploaded the image to the website. Wikicology (talk) 10:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Possible copyrighted image. Robert Hurst is neither a sailor nor employeee of the U.S Navy. As with the other images attributed to him on Commons, he only uploaded the image to the website. Wikicology (talk) 10:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Chrisjamesking234 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Looks like the same kind of flickrwashing as Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Jessicawilson2: images titled "CK Morgan blah blah blah", credited to a Flickr account to which they were uploaded the same day. Chrisjamesking234's images were all uploaded the day after the deletion request was raised against Jessicawilson2's uploads. At least one image (File:CK Morgan and lil kim.jpg - a photo of Morgan next to an unrelated photo of Lil Kim) is plainly used without proper licencing.

McGeddon (talk) 11:05, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Logo of a minor Indian company; I've just deleted en:Bill Bachao because it didn't really demonstrate importance (this is a much lower standard than the notability concept over there), so it's likely that this won't get used in any articles, and as a logo, it's not something that would be useful when talking about something other than its owning company. "Owning" in the trademark sense; this is obviously PD-textlogo from a copyright standpoint. Nyttend (talk) 11:42, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Error in Image Upload Officialhashtag (talk) 11:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused text document of questionable notability, out of project scope. If this is useful, content should be transferred in plain wikitext to one content wiki Jianhui67 talkcontribs 11:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looks to be scanned from a newspaper or other published source, and is from 1954, so cannot be PD in the UK. Flickr user would not have the ability to license it. Carl Lindberg (talk) 12:03, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is a postcard, see http://www.delcampe.net/page/item/id,383669970,var,CPM-41-Facsimile-of-the-1829-Shillibeer-Horse-Omnibus,language,E.html , so Flickr license is meaningless. The postcard looks considerably more modern than 1929, so most likely a much newer photograph which is still under copyright. Credited to "London Transport". File has been marked "all rights reserved" at Flickr source, an indication the user there does not own copyright. At the very least, since this photo could not have been taken more recently than 1929, it was under copyright in the UK in 1996 and thus is still under copyright in the US due to the URAA. Carl Lindberg (talk) 12:13, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

1973 publication date, uploader does not appear to own copyright Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 12:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looks like NFCC rather than free of copyright. Needs proof that this is user's own work. David Biddulph (talk) 12:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:19, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Just a group of people standing around. This was uploaded for use at en:The Cat Association of the Northern Territory Incorporated, which I've just speedy deleted on internal grounds (it also may have been a copyright infringement, although I didn't check for that), and without that article, this image is rather useless. Who's going to use a picture of random people with a big group-specific banner in the immediate background? Nyttend (talk) 13:40, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:19, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:19, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by PavelLy (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).

EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:19, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Third party logo (most probable source is: http://www.psg.fr/ , which is most probably copyrighted). I fail to see how this logo can be "own work" as claimed. Vítor (talk) 13:59, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:00, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://www.poitou-charentes.fr/content-alfresco-portlet/document?uuid=9d2b44af-7c3b-11e3-80ca-9d09c48c74ff. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Commons:Derivative works from letter. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:10, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is a picture of a note made by a very notable professor of atmospheric sciences who had many students. His students of tropical meteorology are numerous (hundreds). This note, or its version, was presented to every student in his 40+ career at Colorado State University. It is as notable as, say, picture of a manuscript by some famous scientist. It was written by Bill Gray and its content was well known in the scientific community. Please keep it. I used it is his biogram. Puncinus (talk) 15:47, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Didym (talk) 00:26, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

As license says, evidence is needed for publication before 1973 or that the author is anonymous. The photo does not come from an archive, but from forum. If people in forum do not know author, then this does not mean anonimity. This is 1911 photo and not enough old to assume public domain without proof. Taivo (talk) 14:10, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It can be deleted. It is usable but has large white border and I downloaded another one. Puncinus (talk) 15:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Creado por equivocación Tusca~eswiki419 (talk) 14:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Incorrectly rendered. File:Flag of the United States.svg exists for long time. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:21, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

this are not sanam entertainment pvt ltd Aks843129 (talk) 02:03, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:SELFIE jdx Re: 14:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:SELFIE jdx Re: 14:24, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:SELFIE jdx Re: 14:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://www.buitems.cf/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/v-3.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Matallex (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like https://static.irk.ru/media/img/site/news/article/4/4132c04e-7319-4a66-9f89-dd8631ae175d_jpg_940x1000_stretch-1_q92.jpg.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:27, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Kfoyeniran (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:28, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:30, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Cmarchioni (talk · contribs)

[edit]

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

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Robwrites13 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

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

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Turtles don't speak jdx Re: 14:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Autoshotdc (talk · contribs)

[edit]

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

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of commons scope Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 14:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of scope Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 15:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of cc scope Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 15:07, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by ThinkingYouth (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Very high quality and "up close" vantage point of a notable person, uploaded in batch of copyvios of this same person claimed as "self" (e.g. File:ArvindKejriwal2.jpg is a Getty Image [5]). Multiple camera models in user's stream, all claimed as self (NIKON D40, DSC-W70, Canon EOS-1D Mark II, NIKON D800E, Canon EOS-1D Mark IV, etc.) Quack!

Эlcobbola talk 15:19, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

copyright violation Mario Maraschi (talk) 15:21, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of commons scope Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 15:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

adds, looks like screenshot Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 15:31, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not out of copyright until 2019 Richard Symonds (talk) 15:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not out of copyright until 2019 Richard Symonds (talk) 15:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

In exif is writen Bruno Konjevic / CROPIX. Looks for me like a media pic. Sanandros (talk) 15:55, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

See Commons:Stamps/Public domain#France. Even if the subject is a painting by Cézanne, it has been modified by another artist (see Category:Paintings of card players by Paul Cézanne). Therefore it's not sure that it's free. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 16:09, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Screen capture (including a mouse tooltip) of a probably copyrighted website. Lacrymocéphale (talk) 16:21, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope Lacrymocéphale (talk) 16:24, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW - appears to be scan of pamphlet Эlcobbola talk 17:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

The source/license and author information of 4 images used in this collage is missing or is insufficient, compromising the whole file. See also Commons:Collages. The image top right was most likely grabbed from Google Street View. Gunnex (talk) 17:31, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed via Google Street View. Gunnex (talk) 17:35, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Azer123az (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unclear copyright statut, out of scope

Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

grostrolleur n'est pas l'auteur de cette photo https://www.amazon.fr/L%C3%A9o-chante-Ferr%C3%A9/dp/B0000084KK Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 17:44, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Carlos marc (talk · contribs)

[edit]

it can be found previously published with a copyright notice "copyright 2011 " at http://rajamusicbank.com/Gallery.php?n=Kousalya

Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Carlos marc (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unlikely to be own work, almost uplaods already deleted (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:DeletedContributions/Carlos_marc)

Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:23, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

the author is not the true one (the pseudo is also on the picture) Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 17:47, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:23, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

own work claim but taken from https://coniddas.wordpress.com/over/ Agora (talk) 17:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:23, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by ANGELA SCORZA (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Per FBMD... grabbed from Facebook.

Rodrigolopes (talk) 18:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:23, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, out of scope file. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:23, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is no freedom of panorama in Uzbekistan. In addition, this is small photo without metadata, own work is not sure. Taivo (talk) 18:57, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:23, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Smaller unused apparent duplicate of File:PSF-sconce.png. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:00, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:24, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:PACKAGING Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:21, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:24, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

From the appearance of this image, it has been previously published. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:24, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Lyrics to John Lennon song, Mr. Lennon has not been dead 70 years. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:24, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:24, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Rephotograph of an advertisement is a Derivative work of the image. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:24, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:24, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by شهد المولى (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:DW - photographs of paintings, at least some of which are here. COM:OTRS permission needed.

Эlcobbola talk 19:33, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:24, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copy from http://www.designtage-brandenburg.de/ Uploader has no Copyright, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer_Diskussion:Sebastian_Stein1#Frage Gleiberg (talk) 19:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:24, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by The Blake School (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Uploaded in batch of copyvios related to this school. Either low res or obviously a promotional shot (e.g., File:BlakeIceArena.jpg). Various cameras (e.g., Canon PowerShot G2, NIKON D3, etc.); File:TheBlakeSchoolHopkins.jpg is used as a thumbnail here. Duck copyvios.

Эlcobbola talk 19:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:24, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

1939 postcard, no evidence that th author died more than 70 years ago Jcb (talk) 19:58, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:24, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


It appears to be clearly in public domain in Germany where it was published. --CSvBibra (talk) 22:33, 16 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.

Files from enwiki user Raj srikanth800

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering en:User talk:Raj srikanth800 (serial copyright violator of local uploads: Flickr/Panoramio etc. grabber, see user talk for details). Also per en:Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 August 24#File:Araku-valley.gif

Nominating also related/affected montages

--Gunnex (talk) 20:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Too recent architecture. No FoP in France. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 20:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Too recent architecture. No FoP in France. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 20:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Too recent architecture. No FoP in France. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 20:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Too recent architecture. No FoP in France. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 20:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

self promotion For (;;) (talk) 17:10, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:52, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

self promotion AGAIN User:Zoha Princess is a sockpuppet of User:Qayyum Ansari see en:User talk:Zoha Princess & en:User talk:Qayyum Ansari Cabayi (talk) 20:42, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:23, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

self promotion, unused image, re-uploaded by a different user suggesting sockpuppetry Cabayi (talk) 13:45, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:01, 17 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.

self promotion Cabayi (talk) 12:12, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: recreation of previously deleted content. --jdx Re: 11:07, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

reupload of self promotion by new sockpuppet Cabayi (talk) 09:08, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: already deleted by Guanaco. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:13, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope — Bukhari (Talk!) 03:29, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: deleted by Yann. --Jon Kolbert (talk) 01:14, 29 July 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 project scope. Personal photo used in deleted promotional en:User:Nidhikabahl. Also used in uploader's blatantly self-promoting user page here (now deleted). JohnCD (talk) 20:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:24, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

see File:Гоголевич ТТС.jpg DmitTrix (talk) 20:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image from the Russian book "Психотерапевтическая помощь людям сложного характера" by Гоголевич Т. Е. (see "Фото 3" here: http://www.medpsy.ru/climp/2014_1_3/article10.php) DmitTrix (talk) 06:33, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

book cover; no evidence of free license; most probably not the uploader's "own work"; see also File:Руководство.jpg DmitTrix (talk) 20:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FoP in Russia for non-architectural artworks. Alexander Roumega (talk) 21:08, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FoP in Russia for non-architectural artworks. Alexander Roumega (talk) 21:10, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Spam --Basotxerri (Diskussion) 16:31, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:23, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

low quality — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taman Renyah~commonswik (talk • contribs) 2016-08-18T02:10:19‎ (UTC)


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

suspected copyright violation! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pitpisit (talk • contribs) 2016-08-23T10:47:31‎ (UTC)


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

I uploaded a file with copyright violations — Preceding unsigned comment added by IBayern (talk • contribs) 2016-08-10T03:41:56‎ (UTC)


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

A person of no notability. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 22:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyvio. Rien dans la source indiquée ne permet d'affirmer que la licence est compatiblr avec Commons. Pitthée (talk) 22:32, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

1960s UK postcard; not out of copyright yet. Carl Lindberg (talk) 22:40, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

1950s UK photograph; still under copyright. Flickr source says it's a postcard scan, so they cannot license it. Carl Lindberg (talk) 22:42, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Source says it's a 1970s UK postcard, and looks like a scan. Not out of copyright for decades yet. Carl Lindberg (talk) 22:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

1950s UK postcard; still under copyright. Carl Lindberg (talk) 22:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

The British Free Corps was a unit of the Waffen SS. The stated Crown Copyright is impossible. Reventtalk 22:57, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:28, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

I believe that Russia has no freedom of panorama for artistic works (architecture is OK). A different picture of this same statue was deleted from the English Wikipedia for this reason. I would use this one instead -- if it was legal, which I think it is not. I assume that the uploader is not the sculptor. Here is the deletion discussion on the English Wikipedia. Herostratus (talk) 23:24, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:28, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

It can read copyrighted musical composition. Copyvio as composed work by ja:大中寅二. LudwigSK (talk) 00:02, 25 August 2016 (UTC) I understand the copyright of this musical composition is still effective, for it has been less than 50 years since the composer's death. I will take down this photo immediately. --Kapibaramushi (talk) 06:15, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:28, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Se tratan de archivos de un artista desactualizados, puesto que se ha cambiado el nombre artístico.

188.86.12.155 00:07, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Se tratan de fotos desactualizadas de un artista que ahora utiliza otro nombre artístico. No es correcto que estén bajo el nombre artístico antiguo.

188.86.12.155 00:12, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 15:26, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Shizhao as no permission (No permission since) Didym (talk) 00:47, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: the 'no permission' tagging is obviously incorrect - deleting as out of scope. --Jcb (talk) 15:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

pedido del autor EMans (talk) 01:05, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate of a less terrible photocopy, File:HMS Brighton (I08) circa 1942.jpg (also it's own DR) and the actual photo itself, File:HMS Brighton, British Town Class destroyer 6 June 1942, Greenock A9220.jpg, which I just uploaded, and which actually has the correct attribution. Reventtalk 02:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat oddly, this image might come somewhat back into scope on it's own due to that the Soviets appear to have doing a not terrible job of trying to erase the big arabic numeral number from the front of the ship at some point. Reventtalk 04:30, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: in use. --Jcb (talk) 15:28, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

doublon avec "File:Blason ville fr Montpezat-de-Quercy (Tarn-et-Garonne).svg" (talk) 06:19, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: in use. --Jcb (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image has been published before: http://ancientclanoneill.com/maguire-macbaron-and-henry-duke%E2%80%99s-crackers-battle-ford-biscuits-7-august-1594. MKFI (talk) 08:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this listed for deletion as it is my own creation. I published it in the ancient clan O'Neill website (I wrote the blog) and I'm sharing it with the Wiki community. I created the map using Photoshop and the Northern Ireland 1:10000 scale OS map as a template for the contours for my Masters dissertation. The appearance of the map in Ancient Clan O'Neill was as part of a blog marking the anniversary of the battle. I am Dr. James O'Neill from University College Cork.

@Galloglass1598: , I did not know that you are also the author of the blog. We get many cases of copyright violations where people take images from the web and then upload them to Commons (and in fact your blog specifically forbids this). In cases like this where the image has been published previously elsewhere it is best to send OTRS permission so we have a record of the license. MKFI (talk) 09:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to that but I'm also a moderator on the Ancient Clan O'Neill site, there will be no problem with this one, the image has more value on the wiki site than the blog

@Galloglass1598: you could also update the blog post to mention that the map is freely licensed as CC-BY-SA 4.0. That would match the license of the file here in Commons. MKFI (talk) 16:19, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done that now.

 Keep Thank you Dr. O'Neill. I believe that is sufficient. I will let another uninvolved user to close this. MKFI (talk) 09:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: revoked by nominator. --Jcb (talk) 15:52, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Most likely COM:Flickrwashing of Getty Images. Josve05a (talk) 08:34, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I checked before uploading with Tineye and Google search, and can't find the image anywhere else. It looks like that that is the only place where the image was released. Furthermore Tim Brabants is employed by NHS, the organisation that released the image. Hzh (talk) 10:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what arrangement they made with Getty Images, I just assumed they had permission (NHS is not a minor organisation, it is the biggest employer in the UK and one of the biggest in the world). Can you check the other pictures in the series, for example this one here? I would assume that it's their own image (they organised the conference), but then who knows. If you are happy with it, please upload the image and use it on his article. Hzh (talk) 12:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well, I'll upload this image if there is no objection, but do let me know if you think there is likely to be any issue with it. Hzh (talk) 21:29, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:53, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

can't find cc-by-sa license in source link Kencola (talk) 09:42, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:53, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

can't find cc-by-sa license in source link Kencola (talk) 09:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:54, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

can't find cc-by-sa license in source link Kencola (talk) 09:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:54, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Possible copyrighted image. Robert Hurst is neither a sailor nor employeee of the U.S Navy. As with the other images attributed to him on Commons, he only uploaded the image to the website. Wikicology (talk) 10:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is a much more widely used greyscale version of this image that come from....some fucking place. The given source does not indicate who took the image, and nobody else seems to give a crap about attributing it either. It's 'likely' PD due to subject matter, but we have nothing beyond what we see in the image.  Delete as having no damn clue. Unfortunately. Reventtalk 16:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's very likely to be PD. Not many people could have taken this aerial view, other than Canadian, British or U.S. Forces. Technically deletable without better documentation, but I'm not sure we should go out of our way to delete this sort of image. -- Asclepias (talk) 19:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Asclepias: You're probably right... the problem is, we have nothing but a guess. I searched at NHHC... they have several nice images that they show they own the copyright to (transferred, presumably) but only one that's clearly PD. I uploaded it, and cropped it down, as an 'other option' at File:USS McCook (DD-252) NH 46470 (cropped).jpg. It's when it the ship was in US service, though... and not, TBH, that great a photograph, technically. Reventtalk 18:11, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This is the one I'd like, but it's apparently believed to be under copyright. Reventtalk 18:13, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I searched at the website of Library and Archives Canada (LAC). They have 42 photographs about this ship, but only 6 are online and none of those 6 are this one or even good views of the ship. One of the 6 is on Commons. A few of the 36 others have interesting descriptions, but they're not online. -- Asclepias (talk) 20:01, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:56, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

I'm not sure if this file fails the threshold for originality regarding icons. Izno (talk) 12:13, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: not below TOO. --Jcb (talk) 15:56, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate file, bad quality Idm (talk) 20:06, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader request, duplicate of File:PFC-Septemvri-Sofia.png. P 1 9 9   16:39, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Dubious licensing, no verifiable source, no evidence this has been first published in Ukrainian SSR before 1951. Sealle (talk) 16:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Файл відповідає ліцензуванню, вказаному на сторінці опису файлу.--Leonst (talk) 15:13, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:52, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Complex script/calligraphy - above COM:TOO - copyright status for terrorist groups is doubtful or non-existent - COM:PRP should be applied

INeverCry 17:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • So to protect other copyvios, lets keep these copyvios? If other terrorist flags are complex like these and the copyright status is in question, they should be deleted. Some are likely to be simple text, so this wouldn't apply to all flags. INeverCry 18:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
First of all please note that the calligraphy of Shahada is not the same in all of the files. For example see the differences between the writing in this file and this one. Secondly, bear in mind that the file on which you are relying and you already confessed to be 'complex', is passing TOO because of being 'complex'. In other words we know that it does not "consist of [merely] simple geometric shapes or text" and deserves deletion. @INeverCry: As said above by MrPenguin20 and per my own evaluation, this file is an Arabic complex calligraphy and is beyond TOO. --Mhhossein talk 18:26, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was using complex as a relative term. It's complex in contrast to the other parts of the work. The complex part of this Best Western logo is for instance the red emblem. Just because it's the complex part of the logo doesn't make it too complex for TOO.
You are correct that there are slight variations in a couple of these flags. Flags with no variations however are -
  • File:Flag of Jabhat Fatah al-Sham.png
  • File:Flag of Jabhat Fatah al-Sham.svg
  • File:Flag of Jaysh al-Muhajireen wal-Ansar.png
  • File:Flag of katibat al tawhid wal jihad.png
  • File:Flag of Jabhat al-Nusra.jpg
That leaves the following flags -
  • File:Al-Nusra.svg
  • File:Flag of Jabhat al-Nusra.jpg
  • File:Flag of the Al-Nusra Front (Variant).svg
  • File:Flag of the Al-Nusra Front.svg
  • File:Nusra Flag.png
Looking at these, whilst there are some differences, they are all only in the slight variations in the placement of letters/diacritics. The question then is whether a slight variation in the placement of a letter is enough to justify an entirely new copyright. I don't see that is it.
I see one of two explanations for these work.
1. They are all considered TOO on the basis of purely being text, and therefore can be published on wikicommons.
2. Due to their incorporation of public domain content, with the changes (slight changes in placement of letters/diacritics) being below the threshold of TOO for new copyright, they can be published on wikicommons.
MrPenguin20 (talk) 11:44, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@MrPenguin20, Editor abcdef, and Tan Khaerr: The flags will be deleted unless you can prove that this exact calligraphy (not other versions) was originated from Afghanistan and were used since 50 years ago. See Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Afghanistan for more info. --Mhhossein talk 12:21, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Which exact calligraphy? The most common version used of the thuluth script utilised in the flags listed has certainly been used in Saudi flags since the 1920s. I think there's an issue here in explanation of who owns what copyright. You seem to be suggesting, for instance, that Jabhat Fatah al-Sham owns the copyright to a design which demonstrably predates it (being uploaded to wikicommons in 2006). Is your argument that the placement of a diacritic, or the length of the tail on an و is enough to create an entirely new copyright? MrPenguin20 (talk) 13:40, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
MrPenguin20:not exactly! At the very first step you should prove that the calligraphy of Shahada (and those which are closely similar with just some slight variations) has a country of origin. Then, we can decide based on the copy right law of that country. If, for example, you can prove that this text was originally used in Saudi some ten years ago, then we'll see if the work is in PD by now or not. --Mhhossein talk 07:10, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The Shahada font used in Nusra flags is identical to the one used in the flag of the w:Sultanate of Nejd more than 95 years ago. The Saudi law is that the copyright expire 50 years after the author's death, so the copyright for this font must have expired according to common sense.
And that is, if we assume that the font originated in Nejd 95 years ago and not Afghanistan 150 or some years ago. Editor abcdef (talk) 08:37, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - Do we have an expert on arabic script on board, who can tell whether this kind of callygraphy could fall under {{PD-Textlogo}}? To western eyes any form of arabic script will always look "complex". But someone who understands it may find the design to be very simple and obvious. Personally I wouldn't want to make such a judgement. --Latebird (talk) 19:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: the part that makes it above TOO is centuries old. --Jcb (talk) 20:59, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

no name of author ; "Fédération Anarchiste" is not an author Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 18:19, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I got the image from Fédération Anarchiste to publish it on Wikimedia Commons. It's from their archive and they have got the rights. --Reclus (talk) 19:10, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Il faut le nom du photographe (et son autorisation) ; "Fédération anarchiste" n'est pas un photographe, et n'est pas l'auteur de la photo, ni l'ayant-droit des droits (moraux et patrimoniaux). Une archive photo sans nom de photographe, cela signifie "auteur inconnu", et donc pas possible de déposer sur commons. (NB. J'ai fait des demandes de suppression identiques pour des photos ayant pour auteur : Radio Courtoisie.) --Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 22:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't speak french. If you are able to change the author or other fiels to be more suitable for Commons please feel free to do so. --Reclus (talk) 22:47, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:00, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

no name of author ; "Fédération anarchiste" is not an author Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 18:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I got the image from Fédération Anarchiste to publish it on Wikimedia Commons. It's from their archive and they have got the rights. --Reclus (talk) 19:10, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Il faut le nom du photographe (et son autorisation) ; "Fédération anarchiste" n'est pas un photographe, et n'est pas l'auteur de la photo, ni l'ayant-droit des droits (moraux et patrimoniaux). Une archive photo sans nom de photographe, cela signifie "auteur inconnu", et donc pas possible de déposer sur commons. (NB. J'ai fait des demandes de suppression identiques pour des photos ayant pour auteur : Radio Courtoisie.) --Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 22:19, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't speak french. If you are able to change the author or other fiels to be more suitable for Commons please feel free to do so. --Reclus (talk) 22:47, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:00, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Aavitus as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: optional URL... which doesn't seem to be a valid reason for deletion. The image appears to be a users photograph of an old painting. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cut it from the frame and delete the older images. Where is the problem? The painting ist really old enough. Marcus Cyron (talk) 19:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't even see why it should be cut from the frame, as no one has claimed that the uploader is not the photographer (frames as a "3D" element in photos of public domain images are only an issue if uploaded by a third party). I also don't get what Aavitus means by "optional URL" as deletion reason... Gestumblindi (talk) 20:39, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Contenu non libre en France et mauvaise qualité. Vida Nova (talk) 16:37, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:37, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Jest kilka zdjęć wykonanych z tego miejsca, to zdjęcie jest gorszej jakości niż inne wykonane z tego miejsca; na prośbę autora — Preceding unsigned comment added by ETR (talk • contribs) 2016-08-08T11:44:56‎ (UTC)


Kept: 'author request' is only a valid reason for deletion within a few days after upload. --Jcb (talk) 21:04, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Jest kilka zdjęć wykonanych z tego miejsca; na prośbę autora — Preceding unsigned comment added by ETR (talk • contribs) 2016-08-08T11:45:19‎ (UTC)


Kept: 'author request' is only a valid reason for deletion within a few days after upload. --Jcb (talk) 21:04, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Jest kilka zdjęć wykonanych z tego miejsca, to zdjęcie jest gorszej jakości niż inne wykonane z tego miejsca; na prośbę autora — Preceding unsigned comment added by ETR (talk • contribs) 2016-08-08T11:44:25‎ (UTC)


Kept: 'author request' is only a valid reason for deletion within a few days after upload. --Jcb (talk) 21:05, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Jest kilka zdjęć wykonanych z tego miejsca, to zdjęcie jest gorszej jakości niż inne wykonane z tego miejsca; na prośbę autora — Preceding unsigned comment added by ETR (talk • contribs) 2016-08-08T11:43:51‎ (UTC)


Kept: 'author request' is only a valid reason for deletion within a few days after upload. --Jcb (talk) 21:05, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kept: no valid reason for deletion;. --Wdwd (talk) 21:18, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Istnieją lepsze zdjęcia wykonane z tej pozycji, np.: File:KWK Ziemowit Lędziny 2.JPG ETR (talk) 11:21, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept No valid reason fro deletion. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:17, 10 February 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.

was replaced by rip offs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcel coenders (talk • contribs) 2016-08-08T06:15:00‎ (UTC)


Kept: no link to supposed replacement. --Jcb (talk) 21:06, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Possible copyvio. Rosalind Franklin died in 1958, so the right crystallography isn't in publik domain and the photo to the left looks like this one http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw62981/Rosalind-Elsie-Franklin by Elliott & Fry half-plate film negative, 11 June 1946 Given by Bassano & Vandyk Studios, 1974, so this isn't too in public domain, and also the text may also by copyrighted. C messier (talk) 13:53, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:C messier Thank you for your attention. This image was uploaded with licence CC-BY-SA 2.0 in mind, as the person who marked it with that licence is perceived of as a serious editor on the site geograph.org.uk .
As I write in the image description of File:RosalindFranklinRoughRetouch.jpg, I found another image that only seem to be identical to the main object of the image composition.
I have requested a licence for the other image from National Portrait Gallery, and it is only this licence that is CC BY-NC-ND 3.0.
It is only this way that I sense a delicate interpretation of the licence by the person that marked his photograph with CC-BY-SA 2.0.
I would like to use this opportunity to learn more about this case and cases like this one. So if you can describe more in detail your reasoning for "copyright violation" it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you--Mysteriumen (talk) 17:01, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mysteriumen, here are three different elements that can be copyrighted;

  • the text (copyrighted probably)
  • the crystallography (photo 51) - I explain above why it's still copyrighted (have not passed 70 years from the creators death)
  • the photo of Rosalind Franklin, which may still be copyrighted, because it was (if it is the same image, which probably it is) produced in 1946 and also its creators are known.
  • and even the arrangement of these elements can be copyrighted. --C messier (talk) 17:09, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, regarding photograph 51 I have made an enquiry at Wellcome images as they are managing some rights for this image https://wellcomeimages.org/indexplus/obf_images/30/58/b908032af2f7be016c9a76bb0745.jpg and accompany it with a general licence by-nc-nd 4.0 . I would like to learn why it is attributed this licence, and I hope they will provide me the details
Regarding the text, it appears to be attributed with a (CC BY 4.0)-licence http://wellcomelibrary.org/item/b1983116x
But when it comes to those posters https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5052318,-0.1126551,3a,15y,12.27h,84.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sV3EAhkRE5De8yxLxMLLhBw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1 , I can only speculate. But the posters / friezes was unveiled in 2010 as described in this blog http://dnaandsocialresponsibility.blogspot.se/ and in this post http://dnaandsocialresponsibility.blogspot.se/2010/10/public-unveiling-of-frieze-celebrating.html . All together the pieces is part of a collaboration Codebreakers: Makers of Modern Genetics where Wellcome Trust is a central part. --Mysteriumen (talk) 19:08, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Of the project they appear to attribute this image http://wellcomelibrary.org/content/timelines/history-of-genetics-timeline/images/29413 with the (CC BY 4.0) licence. --Mysteriumen (talk) 19:12, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have received an answer from Wellcome images, and received a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 licence for a personal use of photo 51. They state "For commercial usage, you will need to seek permission directly from King's College, the contributor of this image." By contributor of this image I understand King's College have uploaded and manage the rights for photo 51, and have chosen a set of licences they intend for selected use.--Mysteriumen (talk) 16:35, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: NC or ND restrictions are not permitted at Wikimedia Commons. --Jcb (talk) 21:08, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]