Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2016/09/29
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
Out of Commons:Project scope: advertisement page. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:14, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Blatant advertising. --Achim (talk) 18:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: looks like resume. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:26, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 06:03, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
I didn't realize one of the subjects was so blurry. Jami (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:47, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted by Ragesoss: Author requested deletion of page
It does not appear to be a drawing created by the uploader. It is most likely a photo derivative put through image software. The uploader probably does not own the photo. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:52, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Found it. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:54, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Speedy delete Qualifies for CSD F3, assuming the original photograph is non-free. Per Commons:Derivative works. 80.221.159.67 04:30, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Achim (talk) 18:03, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
There is no appropriate licence for the file. (I am the owner of the file and am doing this after being made aware of the licencing issue). Andrew Duan (talk) 13:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted by INeverCry: No permission since 23 September 2016
Per the consensus formed in this discussion, "We cannot use material from any VOA site dated after June 2013." According to the source, the file is published on April 28, 2015. Mhhossein talk 11:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
I'd like to add the following to the list:
- File:103rd Street in Johannesburg has been nicknamed "Mogadishio" for its large Somali community. (VOA S. Honorine).jpg
- File:10th death anniversary of Zhao Ziyang 04.jpg
- File:2014 cumhurbaşkanlığı seçimi için oy veren vatandaş.jpg
- File:2014 Hong Kong June 4th Candlelight Vigil (10).jpg
- File:2014 Hong Kong June 4th Candlelight Vigil (13).jpg
- File:2014 Hong Kong June 4th Candlelight Vigil (12).jpg
- File:2014 Hong Kong June 4th Candlelight Vigil (11).jpg
- File:2015 03 10 Hillary Clinton by Voice of America (cropped to collar).jpg
- File:2015 03 10 Hillary Clinton by Voice of America.jpg
- File:2015 03 10 Hillary Clinton by Voice of America (cropped to face).jpg
- File:2015 Bangkok bombing VOA 6.jpg
- File:2015 Bangkok bombing VOA 9.jpg
- File:2015 Hallowenn dog costume party 10.jpg
- File:2015 Hallowenn dog costume party 2.jpg
- File:2015 Hallowenn dog costume party 3.jpg
- File:2015 Bangkok bombing VOA 5.jpg --Mhhossein talk 11:46, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Withdrew the nomination, thanks to User:Taivo's reminding. --Mhhossein talk 06:24, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: withdrawn. --Jcb (talk) 17:03, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation. Source video „Messages from the Land of Epic Battles #8“ by al-Furqān Media. https://jihadology.net/2013/09/26/al-furqan-media-presents-a-new-video-message-from-the-islamic-state-of-iraq-and-al-sham-messages-from-the-land-of-epic-battles-6/ Viii23dawari (talk) 10:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Viii23dawari, if the video was shot by a kidnappee or journalist, it's probably unfree. If the video was shot by a terrorist, it should be considered that the terrorists do not recognize their government, its copyright laws or the Berne Convention. This essentially boils down to {{PD-self}}. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 13:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; it doesn't matter if a terrorist refuses to recognize the legitimacy of their own government, as they are still under its jurisdiction (see also: sovereign citizen), and as such, they are still afforded copyright protection unless they specifically waive it. —holly {chat} 19:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
The original artworks of Death Note are copyrighted.
- File:Unnamed Shinigami.jpg
- File:Death note light up the new world poster2.jpg
- File:Death Note drama series poster.jpg Metrónomo's truth of the day: "That was also done by the president" not an excuse. 22:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: clear copyright violations. --JuTa 14:57, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
File:אורלי תגר הכוסית שבא לי ללקק ולמצוץ לה את כפות רגליה ללקק ולמצוץ לה את הציצי לזיין אותה עמוק בתחת שהיא תלקק ותמצוץ לי את הזין.jpg
[edit]not appropriate picture Kaizer22 (talk) 15:45, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: harassment. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:15, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Image is not up for free use; image is owned by AXIS at Planet Hollywood, and not Spears herself. Livelikemusic (talk) 02:53, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:05, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Private image. Unused, out of project scope. GeorgHH • talk 16:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:05, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Slovemaurya (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal photographs: fail COM:EDUSE.
- File:Alex Siddhartha Maurya 05.jpg
- File:Alex Siddhartha Maurya 04.jpg
- File:Alex Siddhartha Maurya 02.jpg
- File:Alex Siddhartha Maurya 03.jpg
- File:Alex Siddhartha Maurya 01.jpg
- File:Gautam maurya.jpg
- File:SIDDHARTHA MAURYA.jpg
- File:Sweto Maurya.jpg
- File:Siddhartha Maurya.jpg
Utcursch (talk) 01:48, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:20, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Slovemaurya (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
- File:Alex Siddhartha Maurya 05.jpg
- File:Alex Siddhartha Maurya 06.jpg
- File:Alex Siddhartha Maurya 04.jpg
- File:Alex Siddhartha Maurya 02.jpg
- File:Alex Siddhartha Maurya 01.jpg
- File:Alex Siddhartha Maurya 03.jpg
lNeverCry 02:49, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:30, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:30, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:22, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:22, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:22, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
unused personal images : out of scope
- File:Atir Mahmood.jpg
- File:Mahmood Ahmed ( Father).jpg
- File:Mahmood Ahmed (Father0.jpg
- File:At Jinnah bag Lahore Pakistan.jpg
- File:At Lahore The City OF PAkistan.jpg
Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:15, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:08, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
low quality image of com:PENIS, there is enough of this stuff in category:Human penis Pippobuono (talk) 09:58, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:06, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Valchulover (talk · contribs)
[edit]personal photos, out of scope
- File:GHNkYKsi 400x400.jpg
- File:H3d- FM5 400x400.jpg
- File:CCMUmNLWAAAZfWE.jpg
- File:N-G 4tTx 400x400.png
Mjrmtg (talk) 10:34, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:00, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
This would be a derivative work of that book cover, would it? The name of the Flickr user, as given on Flickr, doesn't match any of the names that I can find on the book cover. Stefan4 (talk) 13:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:39, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Small photo without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. I suspect not own work, but copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 11:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mandalesshwar Singh (talk · contribs)
[edit]unused personal photos, out of scope
Mjrmtg (talk) 11:30, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:46, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:05, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
selfie video; only a few user page images are admitted B.Hort (talk) 12:04, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:09, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
selfie video; only a few user page images are admitted B.Hort (talk) 12:20, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:09, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Dieses Foto zeigt ein PRIVATHAUS. ich bin der Eigentümer und möchte kein Bild MEINES Hauses auf Wikipedia. Der Fotograf hat das Foto AUF MEINEM PRIVATGRUND ohne meine Genehmigung erstellt. 188.193.200.8 12:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Der Wunsch ist durchaus verständlich und ich hatte tatsächlich keine Genehmigung zum fotografieren. Andererseits fanden zu der Aufnahmezeit noch öffentliche Auftritte in der Musikmühle statt, so dass das Gelände öffentlich zugänglich war, was in der Rechtsprechung als Erlaubtheitsgrund für die Veröffentlichung von Bildern von Privathäusern angesehen wird. Auch nach der Parzellenkarte im Bayernatlas scheint der Zugangsweg öffentlich zu sein. Öffentlich zugänglich ist er auf jeden Fall. Ich schlage daher vor, das zweite Bild (File:Kunstmühle Langwied-bjs10-01-17-02.jpg), das eindeutig vom Grundstück des Hauses aus aufgenommen worde, zu löschen und das hiesige von dem Zugangsweg aufgenommene Bild, das mit den beiden historischen Aufnahmen in dem Artikel de:Kunstmühle Langwied auch schön die historische Kontinuität demonstriert, zu behalten. Das Kfz-Kennzeichen kan bei Bedarf unkenntlich gemacht werden. --Bjs (talk) 14:58, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 16:12, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Dieses Foto zeigt ein PRIVATHAUS. ich bin der Eigentümer und möchte kein Bild MEINES Hauses auf Wikipedia. Der Fotograf hat das Foto AUF MEINEM PRIVATGRUND ohne meine Genehmigung erstellt. 188.193.200.8 12:26, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- löschen, siehe Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Kunstmühle_Langwied-bjs10-01-17-01.jpg --Bjs (talk) 14:59, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:12, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Aliya Safina (talk · contribs)
[edit]Multiple logos under free license.
- File:Логотип Высшей школы ИТИС КФУ (с 2015 года).png
- File:Логотип ИТИС КФУ (2011-2015).jpg
- File:Логотип ИТИС КФУ.jpg
- File:Логотип Высшей школы ИТИС КФУ.jpg
Bilderling (talk) 13:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:14, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:14, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Delete - uploader blocked on en-wp for persistent self-promotion. JohnCD (talk) 16:46, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by रवि कुमार साह (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:16, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused chart of questionable notability. Should be in MediaWiki graph or SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:16, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:14, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 14:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:14, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by VICTOR SANTORO SANTIAGO (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
- File:ROMA 19600002.pdf
- File:PREMIAÇÃO PENTATLO MODERNO.pdf
- File:ROMA 19600001.pdf
- File:HIPISMO PENTATLO MODERNO0001.pdf
- File:CHEGADA CORRIDA PENTATLO MODERNO0001.pdf
- File:CHEGADA NATAÇÃO PENTATLO MODERNO0001.pdf
- File:ESEFEX 19600001.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:22, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:14, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by TiborKibedi (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: text document of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status of images.
- File:Guide JLW Canberra Lectures Sep2016.pdf
- File:Coherent States.pdf
- File:JLW Group Theory and Quantum Mechanics.pdf
- File:JLW Guelph Lectures 2011 Math QM Appl Nucl.pdf
- File:JLW Lectures QM Grad.pdf
- File:X. Hydrogen Atom.pdf
- File:IX. Central Force Problems in QM.pdf
- File:VIII. Angular Momentum in QM.pdf
- File:VII. Dirac's Solution to One-Dim. H.O.pdf
- File:VI. Axiomatic Foundations of QM.pdf
- File:V. Logical & Math. Struct. of Wave Mech.pdf
- File:IV. Wave Mechanics of One-Dim. Syst.pdf
- File:III. Quantum Physics and Wave Mechanics.pdf
- File:JLW- Lectures undergrad QM (dupl).pdf
- File:II. Logical & Math. Struct. of QM Simple Syst.pdf
- File:TOC.pdf
- File:I. Early Quantum Physics.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:23, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:15, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://www.panoramio.com/photo/54690290.
- File:Entrée Mosquée En Nour Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Panorama Mosquée En Nour Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Minaret Mosquée En Nour Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Vue Mosquée En Nour Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre avant 1962.jpg
- File:Place 2 Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Place 1 Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Vue 2 Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Vue Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Coupole Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Minaret Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Entrée 3 Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Salle Prière 2 Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Salle Prière Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Panorama Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Façade Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Entrée 2 Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Entrée Mosquée Fodil El Ouartilani Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Bibliothèque 2 Mosquée Omar Ibn El Khattab Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Pilier Mosquée Omar Ibn El Khattab Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Bibliothèque Mosquée Omar Ibn El Khattab Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Minbar Mosquée Omar Ibn El Khattab Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Mihrab Mosquée Omar Ibn El Khattab Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Porte Mosquée Omar Ibn El Khattab Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Façade Mosquée Omar Ibn El Khattab Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Entrée Mosquée Omar Ibn El Kattab Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Parking Mosquée Ben Badis Alger.jpg
- File:Centre Culturel Islamique Alger Centre.jpg
- File:Mihrab Mosquée Ben Badis Alger.jpg
- File:Mosquée Ben Badis Alger Avant 1962.jpg
- File:Minbar Mosquée Ben Badis Alger.jpg
- File:Entrées Mosquée Ben Badis Alger.jpg
- File:Façade Mosquée Ben Badis Alger.jpg
- File:Jardin de la Mosquée Ben Badis Alger.jpg
- File:Jardin Mosquée Ben Badis Alger.jpg
- File:Entrée Mosquée Ben Badis Alger.jpg
- File:Minarets Mosquée Ben Badis Alger.jpg
- File:Coupole Mosquée Ben Badis Alger.jpg
- File:Algiers Mosque Ben Badis.jpg
- File:محكمة سيدي أمحمد 1885م.jpg
- File:محكمة سيدي أمحمد.jpg
- File:مجلس قضاء الجزائر.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:26, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:26, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:17, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
File:הרגליים המחרמנות של אורלי תגר הכוסית שבא לי ללקק לה אותן למצוץ לה אותן לשפשף עליהן את הזין שלי ולגמור לה עליהן.jpg
[edit]not appropriate Sus222 (talk) 08:40, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading week. Taivo (talk) 20:04, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
File:הרגליים המחרמנות של אורלי תגר הכוסית שבא לי ללקק לה אותן למצוץ לה אותן לשפשף עליהן את הזין שלי ולגמור לה עליהן.jpg
[edit]not appropriate content Kaizer22 (talk) 15:45, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: harassment. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:15, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Private image. Unused, out of project scope. GeorgHH • talk 16:15, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:06, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Jeazz as Speedy (speedydelete)<\br>scope doesen't qualify for speedy. Sanandros (talk) 23:46, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader request shortly after upload. --Jcb (talk) 16:08, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Wrong data in The Exif File Hamed Gamaoun (talk) 15:18, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:49, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
There is no Freedom of Panorama for sculpture in the U.S. Kaldari (talk) 02:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:49, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo Felviper (talk) 02:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Comment: Most works are copyrighted and does not qualify as a valid reason for deletion. See Commons:Deletion policy for accepted reasons. Delete: But, this file exceeds the threshold of originality and the author probably didn't die in past 70 years if a government work, due to own work
claimed by uploader. Might be a copyright violation. In any case, Commons does not accept fair use. 80.221.159.67 04:39, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:49, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Benoit Albos
[edit]Only used on the French Wikipedia, where the subject's article was speedily deleted as non-notable. Out of project scope. — ξxplicit 02:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 22:13, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Xen hayaka
[edit]Xen hayaka (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)
- File:Fsafsafsafsafsasa.png
- File:Asdfasdfasdfasdf.png
- File:Bearrrrrr.png (source)
- File:ห่ะ.png
- File:Tan2.png (MagazineDee watermark)
- File:Adam2.png
- File:Anceeee.png
- File:Dangerrrrr.png (123RF watermark, though probably
{{PD-shape}}) - File:Bathhhhhhh.png
- File:Faffafafafafafafaafafa.png (source)
- File:Azisssssssss.png
- File:Dddddddddddddsgsgsgsgsg.png
- File:Dfgdfgdfgdfgdfgdfg.png
Nominating for speedy deletion as derivative works of non-free original works (copyright violations), per CSD F1 CSD F3. Only checked the source of few of these, but none of the files state original author or original source to verify permission. --80.221.159.67 03:41, 29 September 2016 (UTC) (edited: 03:46, 29 September 2016 (UTC))
Reuploads by uploader:
- File:+65+98fs.png
- File:Asfasfasf.png
- File:5fsfs5rrrq.png
- File:Wtfwtffafaf.png
- File:Fergtew.png
- File:Saffsafcsa.png
And a new copyvio file:
Speedy delete, tagged appropriately. This account may need to be blocked. 80.221.159.67 04:44, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:50, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
promo article deleted on en.wiki, no reasonable educational purpose served from this photo, no exif either so provenance unknown —SpacemanSpiff 04:11, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Looks like this image may have been deleted as copyvio earlier File:DJ Amith.jpg but as I can't see the image, an admin should check that out. —SpacemanSpiff 04:13, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:50, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
file error Jgm83041 (talk) 04:18, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:50, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Interior of St. Franziskus (Gummersbach)
[edit]The stained glass windows are works of Alois Plum who's still alive:
- File:Gummersbach - Sankt Franziskus in 04 ies.jpg
- File:Gummersbach - Sankt Franziskus in 07 ies.jpg
- File:Gummersbach - Sankt Franziskus in 09 ies.jpg
The tapestry is an artwork of Luise Theill who is also still alive:
The tabernacle and the sculpture were done by Rudolf Peer. As far as I could find out he's also still alive, at least it's quite unlikely that the copyright has expired because the church was built in 1975:
- File:Gummersbach - Sankt Franziskus in 05 ies.jpg
- File:Gummersbach - Sankt Franziskus in 10 ies.jpg
- File:Gummersbach - Sankt Franziskus in 09 ies.jpg
We don't have FoP inside buildings in Germany so the pictures should be deleted. --Code (talk) 04:17, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Delete The images/uploads were made by mistake. I simply didn't realize that the artwork is that modern. Thanks for pointing that out, Code. -- Ies (talk) 15:29, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:50, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Artist Alois Plum is still alive and there is no FoP inside buildings in Germany. Code (talk) 04:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- File:Thong on dark Beach.jpg
- File:Man with thong walking on the beach.ogg
- File:Blue Thong.jpg
- File:Thong Beach.jpg
- File:Man Thong.jpg
- File:Man with Thong in the sun.jpg
- File:Man with Thong sunbathing on the Beach.jpg
- File:Man with Thong on the Beach.jpg
- File:Man with Thong shopping.jpg
Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:26, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Comment Jeazz nominated some files for speedy deletion. They are eligible for speedy as uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 09:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:27, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 22:14, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:27, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 22:14, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Please see our project scope. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Artwork of Alois Plum. Artist is still alive and there's no FoP inside buildings in Germany. Code (talk) 04:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope Sturm (talk) 04:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
No need, uploader request Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 04:50, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
copyrighted and still in use-should be hosted locally but can't be on Commons Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 05:10, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Comment: Most works are copyrighted and does not qualify as a valid reason for deletion. See Commons:Deletion policy for accepted reasons. Regarding the image itself, I will not comment on the copyright status. 80.221.159.67 05:41, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Still in use at http://www.cne-escutismo.pt/ .--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:46, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted. --lNeverCry 23:51, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Innenaufnahme von verschiedenen Kunstwerken. Kein Panoramaprivileg, somit URV Artmax (talk) 07:17, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Die Aufnahme zeigt eine Gesamtansicht und ist relevant - illustriert den Text. Möglicherweise ist die Beschriftung zu genau, da alle Objekte benannt werden. Ich werde den Titel auf Gesamtansicht Ausstellung "Popdada" Berlin 2016 kürzen. --Justus Tler (talk) 10:35, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
unused; not personal photo album Finavon (talk) 07:22, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Film poster, no evidence that the uploader is the rights holder as claimed HaeB (talk) 07:22, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Film poster, no evidence that the uploader is the rights holder as claimed HaeB (talk) 07:23, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
From an apparently copyrighted film; no evidence that the uploader is the rights holder as claimed HaeB (talk) 07:24, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Film poster, no evidence that the uploader is the rights holder as claimed HaeB (talk) 07:27, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Film poster, no evidence that the uploader is the rights holder as claimed HaeB (talk) 07:27, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Film poster, no evidence that the uploader is the rights holder as claimed HaeB (talk) 07:27, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Old picture Hubely (talk) 07:50, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --lNeverCry 23:53, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
unused personal photos, out of com:EDUSE Pippobuono (talk) 08:24, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Private image/Photographs of identifiable people/Request of the person in the picture 최광모 (talk) 08:27, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Private image/Photographs of identifiable people/Request of the person in the picture 최광모 (talk) 08:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
To Whom It May Concern, I'm going through the photos I've uploaded in the past and applying for removal step by step for those that meet the criteria for deletion. Due to my own negligence, I was ignorant of these standards at the time I posted the photos. I would like to apply for deletion of photos that excessively infringe on the portrait rights of others, including myself, or that do not fit within the operational scope of Wikimedia Commons. Many of the pictures I upload are used in the Wikiproject and I will not apply for removal of these pictures. Best Regards, Choi Kwangmo. 최광모 (talk) 20:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no reason. --Krd 05:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Private image/Photographs of identifiable people/Request of the person in the picture 최광모 (talk) 08:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
To Whom It May Concern, I'm going through the photos I've uploaded in the past and applying for removal step by step for those that meet the criteria for deletion. Due to my own negligence, I was ignorant of these standards at the time I posted the photos. I would like to apply for deletion of photos that excessively infringe on the portrait rights of others, including myself, or that do not fit within the operational scope of Wikimedia Commons. Many of the pictures I upload are used in the Wikiproject and I will not apply for removal of these pictures. Best Regards, Choi Kwangmo. 최광모 (talk) 20:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no reason. --Krd 05:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Private image/Photographs of identifiable people/Request of the person in the picture 최광모 (talk) 08:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
To Whom It May Concern, I'm going through the photos I've uploaded in the past and applying for removal step by step for those that meet the criteria for deletion. Due to my own negligence, I was ignorant of these standards at the time I posted the photos. I would like to apply for deletion of photos that excessively infringe on the portrait rights of others, including myself, or that do not fit within the operational scope of Wikimedia Commons. Many of the pictures I upload are used in the Wikiproject and I will not apply for removal of these pictures. Best Regards, Choi Kwangmo. 최광모 (talk) 20:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no reason. --Krd 05:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Private image/Photographs of identifiable people/Request of the person in the picture 최광모 (talk) 08:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
To Whom It May Concern, I'm going through the photos I've uploaded in the past and applying for removal step by step for those that meet the criteria for deletion. Due to my own negligence, I was ignorant of these standards at the time I posted the photos. I would like to apply for deletion of photos that excessively infringe on the portrait rights of others, including myself, or that do not fit within the operational scope of Wikimedia Commons. Many of the pictures I upload are used in the Wikiproject and I will not apply for removal of these pictures. Best Regards, Choi Kwangmo. 최광모 (talk) 20:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no reason. --Krd 05:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Private image/Photographs of identifiable people/Request of the person in the picture 최광모 (talk) 10:43, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 00:12, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Private image/Photographs of identifiable people/Request of the person in the picture 최광모 (talk) 08:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Private image/Photographs of identifiable people/Request of the person in the picture 최광모 (talk) 08:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Private image/Photographs of identifiable people/Request of the person in the picture 최광모 (talk) 08:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
To Whom It May Concern, I'm going through the photos I've uploaded in the past and applying for removal step by step for those that meet the criteria for deletion. Due to my own negligence, I was ignorant of these standards at the time I posted the photos. I would like to apply for deletion of photos that excessively infringe on the portrait rights of others, including myself, or that do not fit within the operational scope of Wikimedia Commons. Many of the pictures I upload are used in the Wikiproject and I will not apply for removal of these pictures. Best Regards, Choi Kwangmo. 최광모 (talk) 20:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no reason. --Krd 05:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
Private image/Photographs of identifiable people/Request of the person in the picture 최광모 (talk) 08:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 19:35, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
To Whom It May Concern, I'm going through the photos I've uploaded in the past and applying for removal step by step for those that meet the criteria for deletion. Due to my own negligence, I was ignorant of these standards at the time I posted the photos. I would like to apply for deletion of photos that excessively infringe on the portrait rights of others, including myself, or that do not fit within the operational scope of Wikimedia Commons. Many of the pictures I upload are used in the Wikiproject and I will not apply for removal of these pictures. Best Regards, Choi Kwangmo. 최광모 (talk) 20:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no reason. --Krd 05:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
porque lo subi equivocadamente es para el concurso de wiki love moniments Tommy Guisepitt (talk) 08:36, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Eso no es una razón para borrarla. Es una foto muy buena. (English: That's not a reason to delete it. It's a very good photo.) --Auntof6 (talk) 23:27, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: per Auntof6. --lNeverCry 23:54, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Already published image - needs OTRS verification. Magazine prohibits reproduction without explicit permission "from the publisher" (per impressum [1] page 4). Also purely promotional usage on en-Wiki (out of scope). GermanJoe (talk) 08:38, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:53, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
es que lo subi equivocado es para el concurso de wiki love monuments igual lo van a tener solo permitame subirlo en el enlace indicado para poder concursar Tommy Guisepitt (talk) 08:39, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:53, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
incomplete graphic, superseded by complete svg Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 09:10, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:53, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by AmandinaBource (talk · contribs)
[edit]Fake license - Logo under free license
Bilderling (talk) 09:22, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo. --Jcb (talk) 19:36, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Tally Adler (talk · contribs)
[edit]Fake license - Logo under free license
Bilderling (talk) 09:23, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo. --Jcb (talk) 19:37, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
personal photos, out of com:EDUSE Pippobuono (talk) 09:35, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:37, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
File:Oskar Kokoschka (Pöchlarn-A 1886 - Montreux CH-1980)- portret van dokter Ludwig Adler, 1914 (detail).jpg
[edit]Copyright violation Sam.Donvil (talk) 09:48, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
File:Oskar Kokoschka (Pöchlarn-A 1886 - Montreux CH-1980)- portret van dokter Ludwig Adler, 1914 (detail).jpg
[edit]Copyright violation Sam.Donvil (talk) 09:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:55, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation Sam.Donvil (talk) 09:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:55, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation Sam.Donvil (talk) 09:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:55, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
File:Wiki Loves Art Belgium in 2016 - Museum of Fine Arts, Ghent, Felice Casatori, Girl on a red carpet (detail).jpg
[edit]Copyright violation Sam.Donvil (talk) 09:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:55, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
self promotion, out of com:EDUSE Pippobuono (talk) 09:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:37, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation Sam.Donvil (talk) 09:53, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:56, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation Sam.Donvil (talk) 09:53, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:56, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation Sam.Donvil (talk) 09:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:56, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation Sam.Donvil (talk) 09:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:56, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation Sam.Donvil (talk) 09:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:56, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation Sam.Donvil (talk) 09:56, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:56, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by TimeandUpdate as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: I want to remove this image from wikipedia as i had uploded to use it on my userpage and now i dont want to use it anymore and also not want to be in wikipedia too so. Its better to remove it and this file is no more in use. I agree with a scope-related deletion and a courtesy uploader-requested deletion, however this is not a Speedy candidate (COM:CSD) and should go through a regular DR as it has been up for over a year. Storkk (talk) 10:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks @Storkk: For this. I dont really know what should be done to delete it and its uploader-requested deletion and Obviously its no more in use as i am not using this on my user page. ok thanks for regular DR process. TimeandUpdate (talk) 11:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- @TimeandUpdate: Uploader-requested deletions are speedy candidates only if they are recent ("<7 days" per COM:CSD). Since this image is unused and not realistically useful for an encyclopedic purpose it is likely it will be deleted in a week from today. Best regards, Storkk (talk) 11:52, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:56, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
advertising, out of project scope Thiotrix (talk) 10:44, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:57, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Depicted person lived 1860–1923. Evidence for publishing (or at least creation) before 1917 is needed. Maybe you even know the photographer's name? Without any information the photo should be deleted. Taivo (talk) 10:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:57, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Sculpture was installed after March 1989, per COM:PACUSA. See [2]. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:58, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:57, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Small unused personal photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Agnes Herrera isn't mentioned neither in en.wiki nor in es.wiki. Out of project scope, per description copyright violation is possible too. Taivo (talk) 11:12, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:57, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
There is no Freedom of Panorama for sculpture in Russia. This sculpture is by Лев Григорьевич Голубовский, who likely died in 1974, so will remain under copyright until the end of 2044. If deleted, please add Category:Undelete in 2045. Storkk (talk) 11:13, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:57, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Small unused photo without camera data, per FBMD... in special instructions field of metadata comes from Facebook, the uploader's only contribution, watermark. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 11:18, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:38, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused personal file, the uploader's only contribution. Out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 11:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:38, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:38, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Bad Quality, blurry Hiddenhauser (talk) 13:41, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:57, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from copyrighted character. Category:Golconda Fort has enought media, so out of Commons:Project scope. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:13, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:57, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Work of an artist which is stilla alive Shev123 (talk) 14:32, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:57, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Work of an artist which is still alive Shev123 (talk) 14:33, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Work of an artist which is still alive Shev123 (talk) 14:33, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:57, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
For collages source and license for every used photo is needed. Taivo (talk) 14:35, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:41, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Small, no EXIF, uploader user name is the same as the subject so they can't be "own work" and the copyright is likely not owned by the uploader.
. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:41, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of focus, substandard image quality Mhohner (talk) 14:57, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope. // Gikü said done Thursday, 29 September 2016 15:07 (UTC) 15:07, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:48, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
copyvio: https://plus.google.com/109853930317978946423 // Gikü said done Thursday, 29 September 2016 15:08 (UTC) 15:08, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:48, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
unused pdf of uknown subject, out of scope Pibwl (talk) 15:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:41, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
unused pdf of uknown subject - out of scope Pibwl (talk) 15:29, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:41, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
"dfgjslsfhkpsfsdhh", out of scope along with its copy File:Prueba de carga de archivos.JPG (user's only uploads) Pibwl (talk) 15:30, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:48, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
unused, does't seem to be in scope Pibwl (talk) 15:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
unused book cover, out of scope Pibwl (talk) 15:34, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
doesn't seem to be in scope, along with three other user's uploads. Pibwl (talk) 15:34, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:48, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
a newspaper, out of scope, questionable copyright, along with File:Così 05.09.2012.jpg Pibwl (talk) 15:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
doesn't seem to be an encyclopedical person, sole upload, no category Pibwl (talk) 15:39, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
unusable, possibly abandoned wikiversity image Pibwl (talk) 15:46, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
unused video, out of scope - abandoned wikiversity video Pibwl (talk) 15:48, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Why is this coat of arms in the public domain? Discasto talk 15:57, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
unusable abandoned wikiversity video Pibwl (talk) 16:07, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Private image. Unused, out of project scope. GeorgHH • talk 16:17, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Private image. Unused, out of project scope. GeorgHH • talk 16:17, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Private image. Unused, out of project scope. GeorgHH • talk 16:18, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Private image. Unused, out of project scope. GeorgHH • talk 16:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
No encyclopedic value; used on promotional user page on enwiki TJH2018talk 16:23, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Unfortunatelly, Mariano Benlliure died in 1947 and therefore, the rights of his works do not enter into the public domain until 2038. If the works are publicly exhibited in an open place (a museum is not valid), they can be eligible to stay in commons, as FoP applies. Here we have pictures of a work exhibited in a museum. Therefore, they are not free
Discasto talk 16:28, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:43, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:Mariano Benlliure
[edit]Unfortunatelly, Mariano Benlliure died in 1947 and therefore, the rights of his works do not enter into the public domain until 2038. If the works are publicly exhibited in an open place (a museum is not valid), they can be eligible to stay in commons, as FoP applies. Here we have pictures of a work exhibited in a museum. Therefore, they are not free
- File:Bust del mestre Josep Serrano, museu de la Ciutat de València.jpg
- File:Busto de Alfonso XIII en el palacio de la Magdalena (10 de diciembre de 2014, Santander).JPG
- File:Gitana de Mariano Benlliure - Palacio de las Dueñas.jpg
- File:Mariano Benlliure - Busto de Goya.JPG
- File:Portrait of the painter Jose Villegas (1887), Mariano Benlliure - Museo de Bellas Artes, Plaza de Museo, Seville.jpg
- File:Teodor Llorente i Olivares, obra de Marià Benlliure (1909).jpg
Discasto talk 16:30, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: This is probably 2028, not 2038. Commons:Copyright rules by territory#Spain says "works of authors who died before December 7, 1987 ... are dealt with by the 1879 law, which sets a protection time of 80 years post mortem auctoris". --Closeapple (talk) 19:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Comment You're right :-) --Discasto talk 21:04, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:Mariano Benlliure
[edit]Unfortunatelly, Mariano Benlliure died in 1947 and therefore, the rights of his works do not enter into the public domain until 2038. If the works are publicly exhibited in an open place (a museum is not valid), they can be eligible to stay in commons, as FoP applies. Here we have pictures of a work exhibited in a church. Therefore, they are not free
- File:Capilla de la Asunción. Catedral de Cuenca.jpg
- File:Cristo Yacente Mariano Benlliure Hellín-.jpg
- File:Cristo Yacente Mariano Benlliure Hellín.jpg
- File:Fundación Joaquín Díaz - El Descendido, por Mariano Benlliure - Zamora.jpg
- File:Gracia.jpg
- File:Paso Miguel Pellicer. Foto - J. A. Bielsa Arbiol.JPG
- File:Salamanca - Catedral Nueva, Capilla de la Soledad 2.jpg
Discasto talk 16:36, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Comment: This is probably 2028, not 2038. Commons:Copyright rules by territory#Spain says "works of authors who died before December 7, 1987 ... are dealt with by the 1879 law, which sets a protection time of 80 years post mortem auctoris". --Closeapple (talk) 19:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Comment You're right :-) --Discasto talk 21:04, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:44, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Private image. Unused, out of project scope. GeorgHH • talk 16:36, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:45, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Private image. Unused, out of project scope. GeorgHH • talk 16:37, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:45, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
no real educational use Pibwl (talk) 16:41, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:45, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
out of scope Pibwl (talk) 16:41, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:45, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by 13atokstbanaweqc (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal photos, out of scope.
- File:Zokzok wedding photo with ama.jpg
- File:Zokzok and dad with coconut trees old photos.jpg
- File:Xmas party dad with apollo employees at atok residences.jpg
- File:Dad with friends in atok residences.jpg
- File:Dad dinner with friends old photo.jpg
- File:Dad in pedestrian gate of atok residences.jpg
- File:Dad getting award old photo.jpg
P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:46, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:45, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
{{Not-PD-US-URAA}}. also, the work ("The Little Red Book") is first published in 1964, not 1950. DS (talk) 16:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: we don't do URAA deletions. --Jcb (talk) 19:46, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
{{Not-PD-US-URAA}}. also, the work ("The Little Red Book") is first published in 1964, not 1950. DS (talk) 16:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Keep If I understand well, the creator is the printing office of the People's Republic of China, hence the copyright holder is a "juristic person". Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 19:56, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Being a work of "juristic person" does not make the work PD in the United States. --DS (talk) 15:29, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
- It is in the public domain in the country where it was produced. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 16:49, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
- Being a work of "juristic person" does not make the work PD in the United States. --DS (talk) 15:29, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: we don't do URAA deletions. --Jcb (talk) 19:47, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
The cup is protected with copyright. The photo is derivative work and should be deleted. Taivo (talk) 17:08, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Not in use, self-promotion, out of scope. Achim (talk) 18:32, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:59, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2019 WQUlrich (talk) 18:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2019 WQUlrich (talk) 18:50, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2019 WQUlrich (talk) 18:50, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2019 WQUlrich (talk) 18:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2019 WQUlrich (talk) 18:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2019 WQUlrich (talk) 18:51, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2019 WQUlrich (talk) 18:52, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2019 WQUlrich (talk) 18:52, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2021 WQUlrich (talk) 18:53, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2021 WQUlrich (talk) 18:53, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2021 WQUlrich (talk) 18:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2021 WQUlrich (talk) 18:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2021 WQUlrich (talk) 18:54, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2021 WQUlrich (talk) 18:55, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2021 WQUlrich (talk) 18:55, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2021 WQUlrich (talk) 18:55, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2025 WQUlrich (talk) 18:59, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Undeleted Now PD in Spain (Spain is exactly 80 years PMA for authors before 1987). Abzeronow (talk) 01:49, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2021 WQUlrich (talk) 18:59, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Still copyrighted in Spain until 2021 WQUlrich (talk) 18:59, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Coat of arms of Tunisia.svg. Fry1989 eh? 19:22, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused personal image (with promotional description), out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:24, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:47, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused personal image (with promotional description), out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:26, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:47, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Personal image without educational value and therefore out of the Commons project scope. Commons is not a public photo album. De728631 (talk) 20:00, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Wikicology (talk) 21:31, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:47, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of project Sakhalinio (talk) 20:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:47, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Welrjkhaewlkb (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of project scope. This user's only edits were draft bios of political candidates. All three were declined as non-notable; six months on, they have been deleted under en:WP:CSD#G13 as abandoned drafts.
JohnCD (talk) 20:21, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 19:45, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Uncertain licensing - apparently it came from Flickr, but no exact source indicated, therefore licensing unknown Hzh (talk) 23:25, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Jeazz as Speedy (speedydelete)
scope doesen't qualify for speedy. Sanandros (talk) 23:44, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 14:05, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 17:04, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Uncertain licensing - may have been taken from a twitter post https://twitter.com/mrtmalaysia/status/775529012860891136 copyright belongs to MRT - http://www.mymrt.com.my/ Hzh (talk) 23:48, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Hanuman66 as Speedy (Löschen) Sanandros (talk) 23:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- As a clarification for non-German speaking readers, the reason given was, roughly: "Please delete my photograph. I now look considerably older and the picture creates the impression I wanted to seem younger, which undermines the seriousness of my appearance." -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 00:56, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: per COM:INUSE. --lNeverCry 00:01, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 78.134.77.214 as duplicate (dup) and the most recent rationale was: licate|Bae Suzy at "The Last Ride" red carpet, 14 April 2016 02.jpg
It's not exact or scaled down. Instead it's cropped. Sanandros (talk) 23:59, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --lNeverCry 00:01, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
This is a rather complex copyright problem, but I think it needs bringing up. The current description for this image just says that it's a Victorian circus poster—but as far as I can tell, this image exactly matches the 2012 reproduction shown here. In other words, it isn't a PD circus poster, but a modern replica of same. Does this mean that the image is not PD by Commons standards? Lemuellio (talk) 00:47, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- It's s older than 100 years of age; the copyright has expired. Did the Beatles pay for that ? --Io Herodotus (talk) 04:52, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- My apologies for being unclear. Yes, the original poster is clearly old enough, but I don't think this is the original poster; it appears to be a replica that was made by hand in 2012, recreating the whole design from scratch using wood type. (The link in my original post has more info.)
- So my question is simply this: what is the Commons policy on from-scratch reconstructions of old works? Are they considered automatically to share the copyright status of the original work (in which case this image is PD), or are they eligible for copyright protection on their own (in which case we need to think about taking this image down)? Lemuellio (talk) 11:29, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- My apologies, I probably didn't read it completely.--Io Herodotus (talk) 11:26, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: The original design is from 1843 and any reproductions aiming to faithfully copy the original do not need any creativity of their own and are thereby ineligible for copyright. The original upload of this file is from 2007, transfered from en:wp where it must have been uploaded even earlier. This is obviously not even derived from the 2012 reproduction. Possibly the more recent upload is. But as it is possible to compare this two versions, it is clear that the reproduction has no originality of its own. At least none is recognizable at the resolution we have here at present. --AFBorchert (talk) 12:20, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Jcb as no source (No source since) Fæ (talk) 03:38, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
This is a common sense PD scan, the reference and source were sufficient, so threatened 7 day deletion does not help the project. If anyone needs a link to belive PD status they could add http://scaa.usask.ca/gallery/regina/north/railways.html --Fæ (talk) 03:45, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - there is no source provided for publication before 1923. Such a source is necessary if we want to keep this file - Jcb (talk) 14:56, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kept: A source was given right from the moment of the upload. It was first given in its description, then it was subsequently moved to the source field. Given the accurate source, it was trivial to find the corresponding web page. I added a weblink pointing to it. --AFBorchert (talk) 12:27, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Likely copyvio, as not all these toys appear hand-made by amateurs, per COM:Plushies. Fæ (talk) 15:49, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
- Hmmm, as the image focusses on the ensemble (or still life, if you want) and none of the potentially design-copyrighted toys is visible in full, it might be o.k. per de minimis; Keep. --Túrelio (talk) 10:00, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- The photograph was taken in Germany, so German and US copyright are relevant. The most basic guiding word for COM:DM is that usage must be "trivial". Any object which is the focus of a photograph is not normally interpreted as a trivial representation. Using the German act, we must consider (a) if the toys "may not even have the slightest contextual relationship" with the subject of the photograph and a test given for this is (b) the object's presence is "negligible to such a degree that it could easily be removed without even the slightest impact on the appearance of the actual object to the average viewer". This photograph is easily seen to fail (a) and (b). With regard to none being "visible in full", I see a couple of the toys actually are visible in full, but it is true that any photograph of a 3D toy can normally only reproduce less than half of the design of the toy. This argument, or an argument that partial occlusions may void copyright are not explored in the current policy.
- Should this image be kept, then I believe this would be a new interpretation of De minimis for Commons and it can usefully be added to the examples gallery in the official policy. --Fæ (talk) 10:55, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- The camera appears to be utalitarian, and Punky + Wendy look like some animals, so maybe not copyrightable, see the toy airplane example below COM:UA, and the blurb about threshold of originality in the next paragraph. That leaves 2 of 5 visible objects, where I'll let you "hug it out". –Be..anyone (talk) 19:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Soft toys are designed works, and are nothing similar to utilitarian objects with a design constrained by their function. There are plenty of examples of commercial merchandize where the toy has an eagerly defended copyright but is a cartoonish animal exactly like those in this photograph. --Fæ (talk) 11:04, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- I doubt that the accumulation of simple plushies - we are not talking about Star Wars characters, Mickey Mouse or Asterix - must be seen as an art object. I think these plushies are therefore too simple to meet the threshold of originality. Keep --Geolina mente et malleo ✎ 21:32, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- COM:UA is an aspect in United States law but usually doesn't hold in European countries (except for the British Commonwealth and Ireland where it probably is applicable). Utilitarian objects seem to be subject to copyright protection in Germany (but the camera is de minimis in my opinion). --Stefan2 (talk) 22:41, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- ACK, but the paragraph with a link to threshold of originality actually tries to explain the German Schöpfungshöhe, and Fæ mentioned German law. IANAL, but from Germany. At least we're not talking about stamps or coins.
–Be..anyone (talk) 13:22, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- ACK, but the paragraph with a link to threshold of originality actually tries to explain the German Schöpfungshöhe, and Fæ mentioned German law. IANAL, but from Germany. At least we're not talking about stamps or coins.
- COM:UA is an aspect in United States law but usually doesn't hold in European countries (except for the British Commonwealth and Ireland where it probably is applicable). Utilitarian objects seem to be subject to copyright protection in Germany (but the camera is de minimis in my opinion). --Stefan2 (talk) 22:41, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- The camera appears to be utalitarian, and Punky + Wendy look like some animals, so maybe not copyrightable, see the toy airplane example below COM:UA, and the blurb about threshold of originality in the next paragraph. That leaves 2 of 5 visible objects, where I'll let you "hug it out". –Be..anyone (talk) 19:36, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
-_portret_van_dokter_Ludwig_Adler,_1914_(detail).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_-_De_schrijver_Walter_Mehring,_1926.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
-2016-09-29T18:47:00.000Z-File:Wiki_Ed_at_Ole_Miss_4.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
-_portret_van_dokter_Ludwig_Adler,_1914_(detail).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
-_portret_van_dokter_Ludwig_Adler,_1914_(detail).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
-_portret_van_dokter_Ludwig_Adler,_1914_(detail).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_-_De_schrijver_Walter_Mehring,_1926.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_De_schrijver_Walter_Mehring,_1926.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_-_De_schrijver_Walter_Mehring,_1926.jpg){kind=link}
_-_De_schrijver_Walter_Mehring,_1926.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_Mariano_Benlliure_-_Museo_de_Bellas_Artes,_Plaza_de_Museo,_Seville.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
- Keep per Geolina. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:51, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
- Keep see also Meta:Requests for deletion#Wikimedia Cuteness Association --1971markus ⇒ Laberkasten ... 00:31, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. As pointed out, this is not Disney/Star Wars merchandise and these plushies are arguably too simple to meet originality criteria.
- Also 1971markus points out above, there is some background here. Also, see also where this chain of events appears to begin.
And I can't help but feel that this nomination is not only erroneous, but is particularly bad, because it's basically copyright-trolling; Something the whole open movement pretty much exists in opposition to.- We believe that the freedom to use of our creative works and the ability to access and use others' work is something worth fighting for, or at least writing strongly worded letters and signing petitions for.
- Strong, but realistic and up-to-date copyright law is important. And respecting existing copyright law is good practice for our movement's credibility.
- But going out of your way looking for a technicality to prohibit a set of images that even any possible copyright-holders couldn't enforce and wouldn't care about anyway, and enforcement of this "policy" possibly affecting many more users in the future and retrospectively, not to mention that the images are from some prolific, long-term community members whose contributions online and offline are extensive, and this clearly being some kind of retaliation to some edits on Meta...
- ...it's like, defecating in the community swimming pool to protest against something another swimmer did, actually in another pool. Now everyone has to swim in the dirty pool, including you.
It's vexatious, it's not a good use of anyone's time and it's against the overall goals of the movement.Battleofalma (talk) 10:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)- @Battleofalma, while I want very much like to keep this image (see my above vote), please remove your ad-hominem-attack against the nominator. This is totally inappropriate. --Túrelio (talk) 12:19, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Túrelio, fair enough, is strikethrough ok? This isn't ad hominem though, it is vital context across Wikis. It's not "You have done this because you are this", it's "You have done this and also, this, this and this." but I know this isn't necessarily the forum to point this out. But to reiterate, I don't think the case for copyright infringement is strong, the main reason being originality criteria. Battleofalma (talk) 10:04, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Battleofalma, while I want very much like to keep this image (see my above vote), please remove your ad-hominem-attack against the nominator. This is totally inappropriate. --Túrelio (talk) 12:19, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- "Copyright holders wouldn't care about anyway" is specifically not a justification for keeping files at Commons.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:53, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- I refuse your attempt to make this into an ad hominim battlefield. COM:DM, COM:UA and the section COM:TOYS apply to all Commons images, we do not turn a blind eye just because the uploader is a Wikimedia insider rather than a new contributor. If as a community we do not believe these official policies, then we should change them. --Fæ (talk) 11:01, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- The section COM:UA contains a lot of information about United States copyright law, but there's not much information about other countries, except for a quick statement that other countries may have different rules. Per COM:L, files have to be free in both the source country and the United States, and since COM:UA doesn't contain a lot of discussion about other countries, the section is, in its current state, only useful for determining the copyright status of utilitarian objects within the United States. There are plenty of court rulings from various European countries where utilitarian objects have been declared copyrighted, so there are clearly countries which take a different approach than the United States. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:45, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Fæ: Your way of acting on Meta was rude, hostile and for experienced editors unworthy. You did put false claims there without doing any effort to give evidence, nor you did effort to look the subject up at all (but instead false assumptions), and yes, you made some users angry with your disturbing behaviour. I would classify exactly that behaviour in general as one of the reasons why less editors are active on Wikipedia. So if you point to other user(s) that they react "ad hominim", please be aware that you started the issue by behaving terrible and that people also react on that behaviour what you used there. Of course Meta is not Commons, but do not play happy miss sunshine as you are the direct cause of it. People do not turn a blind eye just because the uploader considers himself a Wikimedia insider, nobody has a wild card. Romaine (talk) 00:31, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- The section COM:UA contains a lot of information about United States copyright law, but there's not much information about other countries, except for a quick statement that other countries may have different rules. Per COM:L, files have to be free in both the source country and the United States, and since COM:UA doesn't contain a lot of discussion about other countries, the section is, in its current state, only useful for determining the copyright status of utilitarian objects within the United States. There are plenty of court rulings from various European countries where utilitarian objects have been declared copyrighted, so there are clearly countries which take a different approach than the United States. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:45, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- I refuse your attempt to make this into an ad hominim battlefield. COM:DM, COM:UA and the section COM:TOYS apply to all Commons images, we do not turn a blind eye just because the uploader is a Wikimedia insider rather than a new contributor. If as a community we do not believe these official policies, then we should change them. --Fæ (talk) 11:01, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- The DR was raised in good faith, your allegations are in bad faith, and seem to have no relevance to whether the image should be hosted on Commons. I note your use of gender as offensive, don't do that, it's not welcome. --Fæ (talk) 01:41, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
- Comment I don't have a opinion on de minimis here. However, there are teddy bears registered with the Copyright Office, like one of the ones that Wal-Mart has every Christmas. The threshold for copyrightability of original works is pretty low.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:53, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete The French Supreme Court ruled that photos of fairly simple chairs infringed the copyright of the chairs.[3] There's no indication that Germany treats works of applied arts any different to France, and the toys are quite complex. Additionally, toys are copyrighted in the United States. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:41, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Template:RPA --Yann (talk) 14:38, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
After a series of counter-views by experienced Commons contributors at Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Interpreting_COM:TOYS for photographs taken by established Wikimedians, I am raising this request.
The photograph fails to meet the official guidelines of COM:TOYS, specifically:
- When uploading a picture of a toy, you must show that the toy is in the public domain in both the United States and in the source country of the toy. In the United States, copyright is granted for toys even if the toy is ineligible for copyright in the source country.
There has been no evidence presented that the soft toys which are the central focus of this photograph are public domain.
For an in-depth background and explanation of Commons copyright policies, refer to the Stuffed Animals essay and prior related deletion requests DR1 Wendy the Weasel and Percy Plush and DR2 Wikimania 2014.
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Fæ (talk) 10:44, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep - First "a series of counter-views by experienced Commons contributors" seems to me not true, as only 3 people besides you react there. How to frame a deletion request in such way that other users are impressed, sorry, I don't buy this kind of framing. Further, to quote "When uploading a picture of a toy" it is not "a toy", but a group of toys that are in a fun way displayed by the people on site. Third, only a very small portion of the photo is actually showing the stuffed animals itself. Only less than 20% of the photo is showing the stuffed animals. Fourth: on the other images the stuffed animals are fully focussed and very large on the photo, comparison to those deletion requests seems to me another attempt of framing it, as that is not the case here. Romaine (talk) 20:11, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- If you are putting a de minimis case, that does not seem appropriate as the focus of the photograph is the toys, in fact there is no other possible reason for this photograph to be taken. This is demonstrably true due to the title and description of the photograph (which is relevant to the de minimis policy) being about the toys, and if the area with the toys in it were blanked out, more like half the photo would have to be blanked, and what is left is a table and two out of focus chairs.
- To be kept according to policy which is fairly applied to all images, there must be evidence that the toys are in the public domain. If you refer to the random sample of similar photographs of stuffed toys listed in the copyright noticeboard discussion, only 1 out of 12 has not been deleted, and that is because there is some evidence that the Steiff toy is in the public domain. Interpreting policy differently apparently just because the photograph is of special interest to Wikimedians, and was taken at a Wikimedia event, would be a poor precedent.
- Perhaps you would like to help by ascertaining the copyright of the toys, normally there is a tag on the toy with the manufacturer's name, and there may be a statement about copyright that would be worth capturing. --Fæ (talk) 21:40, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- @Romaine: That is, quite simply, not how de minimis works. The inclusion of the toys is neither incidental nor inadvertent... they are clearly the focus of the image, and can not be removed without making the image useless for the obviously intended purpose. Delete, unless evidence can be provided that the toys are PD or in the public domain, as a derivative work of several objects that are almost certainly copyrighted. Reventtalk 11:45, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
- I think it was my mistake to upload some one of this Pictures in this categorie, i will upload in the future no more images... thank you and good bye --1971markus ⇒ Laberkasten ... 00:44, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: The best test of de minimis is asking whether the offending object could be removed without materially affecting the image. Obviously, if you removed all the toys from this, you would have an empty, boring table. The fact that half a dozen copyrights are infringed, rather than just one, does not somehow make it all right. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:40, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Perhelion as no source (No source since). Now replaced by original source found with correct license as PNG. ↔ User: Perhelion 13:06, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Superseded by File:FMP Stiftung Logo.png which is correctly sourced unlike this file which is currently unused. --AFBorchert (talk) 12:37, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused logo. // Gikü said done Thursday, 29 September 2016 15:05 (UTC) 15:05, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Can be used if someone ever decides to write an a article about http://www.vonino.eu/ --Sreejith K (talk) 15:10, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Logos of companies that do not appear to be notable are usually deleted if unused. This logo was uploaded in an misguided attempt to write an article about this company which was apparently speedied on two different Wikipedia projects. --AFBorchert (talk) 12:45, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Per uploader's request, shortly after it was uploaded. It is unused at the time of deletion. --AFBorchert (talk) 12:53, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Copyvio, no free license at source website, which states: "© Foto: Roland Zumbühl, 27.07.04" - sending to regular DR, because file has had several taggings and removal of taggings in the meantime, but feel free to speedy delete. Jcb (talk) 15:02, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- The image was apparently uploaded as part of the Commons:Picswiss project (over 5,000 images with the same characteristics of this one, i.e. no free license at source website, were uploaded to Commons). Permission by Roland Zumbühl for sharing his images from the Picswiss website is at Commons:Picswiss/Permission. I have left a message in Zumbühl's talk page for having a comment from him here. --Cavarrone (talk) 19:44, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- I'm afraid we have a serious issue, broader than this single file. As far as I understand the German text, this seems to be a 'Wikipedia only' permission. I will bring this to the Administrators Noticeboard, to see what others think. Jcb (talk) 20:32, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Copy of the response therefrom:
- I'm afraid we have a serious issue, broader than this single file. As far as I understand the German text, this seems to be a 'Wikipedia only' permission. I will bring this to the Administrators Noticeboard, to see what others think. Jcb (talk) 20:32, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
No, the restriction is that only pictures by Zumbühl may be used on Wikipedia, not pictures by other fotographers on picswiss. --Magnus (dyskusja) 20:44, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
- Ankry (talk) 13:30, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
- I am not satisfied with this answer. A quotation from the release: "mag wenige Leute begeistern, diese Bilder zu klauen und kommerziell zu vertreiben" --> He does not think that people want to steal these files to use them commercially. If he would agree with the free license, he would not call commercial usage 'klauen'. So please tell me whether this German sentence needs to be explained completely different? Because as far as I understand the text, the release is incompatible. Jcb (talk) 13:48, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
- Ankry (talk) 13:30, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep because of the permissions page. Someone requested permission to use them according to Wikipedia's licensing terms, and he said that those terms are not in conflict with his own terms and conditions: how unambiguous do you think we have to be? He's not placing restrictions on the off-wiki use of his own pictures; the only appearances of "Wikipedia" in the whole message are an acknowledgement of what the first person said and a comment that he welcomes their use because it's free advertising. And finally, once you've specifically said that your images may be used under a free license, it doesn't matter what else you say: you can't revoke a free license, so we can say that (1) you first gave the free license and then made an unenforceable attempt to revoke it, or (2) you first gave a nonfree license and then permitted use under a free license, or (3) you're merely giving multiple options, comparable to {{GFDL or cc-by-nc-2.0}}, which we permit despite the noncommercial license because it also includes a free license. Nyttend (talk) 14:40, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
- Comment User:Roland Zumbuehl himself is currently uploading lots of photos directly to Commons under a CC-BY-SA license, also under a higher resolution than the older Picswiss images, see his contributions. It's true that in the 2004 mail he wrote of people "stealing" images, but it still seems that he agreed to the free license (GNU-FDL then, CC-BY-SA now). In addition to Cavarrone's message on his talk page, I tried to explain the doubts expressed here in German, and recommended confirming the license via OTRS. Gestumblindi (talk) 18:06, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Now Keep: Roland Zumbuehl posted a reply on his talk page where he clarified "Wichtig ist einzig, dass bei den genutzten Bildern mein Name erwähnt wird. Unter "Klauen" verstehe ich, dass jemand Fotos von mir unter seinem eigenen Namen präsentiert", translated into English: It's only important that people mention my name when using pictures. With "stealing" I mean people displaying my photos under their own name. Gestumblindi (talk) 10:25, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per permission + clarification. --Cavarrone (talk) 21:13, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
- Comment Das sollte bitte wirklich über unser Support-Team abgewickelt werden, d.h. über permissions-commons-de@wikimedia.org. --AFBorchert (talk) 12:41, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Comment I think we should put a hold on this until we get an explicit clarification from Roland Zumbuehl via OTRS. Assuming that User:Roland_Zumbuehl is actually the picswiss site owner, then at User_talk:Roland_Zumbuehl he says "Picswiss.ch is a non-commercial, private image archive (Google translation, emphasis added). I am not at all certain that he actually intends to allow free commercial use of his images. A clear OTRS message would both give us the license we need and prove that User:Roland_Zumbuehl is actually the man who owns picswiss.ch, which, by the way, we require. Commons:Picswiss is interesting, but irrelevant, because we require that the e-mail from the licensor come directly to OTRS. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:57, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- Comment German "privat" (in "privates Bilder-Archiv") is, in this context, better translated as "personal" or more loosely as "(project) by an individual", not in the sense of "private" as "not public" or similar. I think he's trying to say that he doesn't want to make money with it (not a "NC" clause). I agree that an OTRS message would be clearly the best thing; on the other hand, his original permission is from 2004 when we didn't have the OTRS system (I think). And this picture was uploaded in August 2006. The first version of Commons:OTRS was created in September 2006. Grandfathering? Gestumblindi (talk) 22:45, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
- I might consider grandfathering if we had lost touch with a pre-OTRS contributor, but User:Roland Zumbuehl has posted here this week, so he is clearly able to clarify this for us. As I suggested above, let's hold the DR for a week or so and get a proper CC-By or CC-BY-SA license via OTRS. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:57, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: No significant doubt here. Thank you everyone for your effort to clarify this. --Natuur12 (talk) 15:25, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
