Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2016/10/20
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
The file is attributed to FilmiTadka, where it appeared on 23 February 2013. However, on 20 February 2013, the file's higher resolution version appeared on this site, which is clearly stating that it's copyrighted to the Indo-Asian News Service (IANS). NitinMlk (talk) 00:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio upload of LTA sockmaster. --lNeverCry 00:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image lNeverCry 01:31, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --shizhao (talk) 02:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
{{Copyvio}} Ilzolende (talk) 02:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 02:44, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
I thought it was public domain, apparently it is copyrighted. Please delete ASAP. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 11:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 11:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
I am the uploader of this photo, although now globally locked by the WMF, and I would like to request deletion of this photo as being out of COM:SCOPE. 124.148.216.223 00:20, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Image still from movie, almost certainly copyrighted Antepenultimate (talk) 00:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
A much higher resolution version - 4928 × 3264 pixels - of the above file's original upload is available on this site, which is attributing the pic to this Flickr account, where it was uploaded a day earlier than its upload at the Commons. And that account's license isn't compatible for its upload at here. NitinMlk (talk) 01:16, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
No indication of the CC4.0 license on the source website as stated Underbar dk (talk) 03:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Copyright violation Huji (talk) 03:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Image is cropped from a video which is Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0), not CC BY 3.0 as claimed Underbar dk (talk) 03:14, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Image is cropped from a video which is Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0), not CC BY 3.0 as claimed Underbar dk (talk) 03:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Image is cropped from a video which is Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0), not CC BY 3.0 as claimed Underbar dk (talk) 03:20, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Image is cropped from a video which is Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0), not CC BY 3.0 as claimed Underbar dk (talk) 03:20, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:52, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Image is cropped from a video which is Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0), not CC BY 3.0 as claimed Underbar dk (talk) 03:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Image is cropped from a video which is Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0), not CC BY 3.0 as claimed Underbar dk (talk) 03:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Image is cropped from a video which is Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0), not CC BY 3.0 as claimed Underbar dk (talk) 03:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Image is cropped from a video which is Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0), not CC BY 3.0 as claimed Underbar dk (talk) 03:23, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Image is cropped from a video which is Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0), not CC BY 3.0 as claimed Underbar dk (talk) 03:23, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Image is cropped from a video which is Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0), not CC BY 3.0 as claimed Underbar dk (talk) 03:23, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Image is cropped from a video which is Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0), not CC BY 3.0 as claimed Underbar dk (talk) 03:23, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Palmy Tomiezz Kim (talk · contribs)
[edit]Own work claim dubious since the images are also on many other web sites, with earlier dates or higher resolution. E.g., http://www.pictaram.com/media/1260097768954649242_3799981
https://www.khaosod.co.th/show_image.html?image=online/2015/09/14419579831441958872l.jpg
--ghouston (talk) 05:16, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
COM:PRP, I searched this image on Google, and I saw too many matching images of this. This is also on Flickr, which is this, but I still have a doubt that this image is non-free. ★ Poké95 06:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:54, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Categories Shakibul Alam Risvy (talk) 07:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted as a copyvio. --lNeverCry 23:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
photo from Reuters 太刻薄 (talk) 08:23, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Lora.lemeschuk (talk · contribs)
[edit]Derivative work of a newspaper and its website are obviously not the work of uploader. Most likely the copyright belongs to the publisher.
Ww2censor (talk) 09:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete Derivative work of a newspaper and its website are obviously not the work of uploader. Most likely the copyright belongs to the publisher. Ww2censor (talk) 09:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Derivative work of newspapers and their websites are obviously not the work of uploader. Most likely the copyright belongs to the publisher, so OTRS verification is required.
Ww2censor (talk) 09:14, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Medical Independent (talk · contribs)
[edit]Derivative work of newspapers and their websites would appear to not be the work of uploader though their username is the same. Most likely the copyright belongs to the publisher, so an official OTRS verification is required.
Ww2censor (talk) 09:17, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Author or uploader request deletion BchkWiki (talk) 12:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Runultratalk (talk · contribs)
[edit]Low res, some of them have no exif or watermarks. Unlikely to be own work.
- File:Robert Young - Marathon Man UK 2014 100 mile centurion race.jpg
- File:Robert Young - Marathon Man UK 2015 ISEH.jpg
- File:Robert Young - Marathon Man UK and Dr Kipps 2015.jpg
- File:Robert Young - Marathon Man UK 2015 testing.jpg
- File:Robert Young - Marathon Man UK 2015 usa finish.jpg
- File:Robert Young - Marathon Man UK 2015 04.jpg
- File:Robert Young - Marathon Man UK 2015 usa.jpg
- File:Robert Young - Marathon Man UK 2015.jpg
- File:Robert Young - Marathon Man UK 02.jpg
- File:Robert Young 01.jpg
- File:Robert Young MarathonManUK.jpg
- File:Robert Young Marathon ManUK.jpg
- File:Robert Young aka Marathon Man UK.jpg
Thibaut120094 (talk) 12:28, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gazr mortada (talk · contribs)
[edit]Promo photos, movie posters, modern art. No evidence of permission(s).
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:17, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Lower quality version of image found at http://www.adrianmunoz.es/prensa Ytoyoda (talk) 14:20, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://www.hindi-kavita.com/amber.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:58, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/57ffd5a8dd0895a4348b4b84-2400/bfa_17567_2195651.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:37, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jalexbogota (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://americadecali.co/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/035-1.jpg.
- File:MERCADOFEIVER.jpg
- File:BALANTAGEIMER.jpg
- File:ALVAREZJONATHAN.jpg
- File:LUCUMIJEISON.jpg
- File:ANGULOBRAYAN.jpg
- File:FERREIRADAVID.jpg
- File:PALACIOSARNOL.jpg
- File:ANGULOJUANCAMILO.jpg
- File:MARTINEZJAROL.jpg
- File:CASTAÑEDAEDER.jpg
- File:BEJARANOCARLOS.jpg
- File:CORTESEFRAIN.jpg
- File:VASQUEZJHONNY.jpg
- File:MOSQUERAJHONNY.jpg
- File:AYALACAMILO.jpg
- File:051-374x547.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete the uploader cannot own the copyright of this album cover. It is owned by the artist or the record label. It could be uploaded locally as a non-free image on those language wikis, such as enwiki, for use the the article of the album if they allow non-free images. Ww2censor (talk) 14:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 23:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete uploaded indicated this is ARR and being an orphan it should probably be deleted besides which it might pass the threshold of originality Ww2censor (talk) 16:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:00, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
I uploaded it incorrectly, I think Dkingsmill (talk) 19:16, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:01, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Files of User:Uchiha amanda
[edit]Photographs of a book which may be published and would be copyrighted. No evidence otherwise. --Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 20:07, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:01, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
BAE publicity video screenshot. No proof of CC license. MKFI (talk) 21:28, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:02, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Ownership by the uploader is doubtful. Tineye shows the image is used across Symbiosis institutional websites since 2012, this is one example: http://www.symbiosis.ac.in/symbiosis-society/images/dr-mujumdar.jpg Brianhe (talk) 22:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:02, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
I have not found an identical-sized photo or larger of this one. Mickey109 has posted a number of photos as "own work" which were deleted as apparent copyright violations. This photo appears identical to a smaller photo published on http://www.muskogeepolitico.com/2016/08/two-third-party-candidates-sue-to.html 15 Aug 16. I don't have access to the paid subscription http://journalrecord.com/2016/08/12/presidential-candidates-sue-over-state-ballot-access-law/ which may or may not have a full-sized photo. The coincidence seem unlikely. Jim1138 (talk) 22:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:02, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
It's lifted from the internet and it's copyrighted. It appears to have been taken from here: http://www.zimbio.com/photos/Edwin+Jackson/Indianapolis+Colts+v+Buffalo+Bills/h2DIt0zityk Jeffrey Beall (talk) 22:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 00:03, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
It's lifted from the internet and it's copyrighted. It appears to have been taken from here: http://www.zimbio.com/photos/Edwin+Jackson/Indianapolis+Colts+v+Buffalo+Bills/h2DIt0zityk Jeffrey Beall (talk) 10:08, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- This is the second time the picture has been uploaded in two days. Jeffrey Beall (talk) 10:40, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted by Hedwig in Washington. ★ Poké95 01:03, 22 October 2016 (UTC) (non-admin closure)
This file was initially tagged as no license (No license since). The date when this postcard was published is needed to determine whether this postcard is in the public domain or not. It seems to look old, but that doesn't mean it is in the public domain. ★ Poké95 08:44, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep as PD. Must be from the 1930s, because the poster on the side of the building indicates that The House of Unrest (1931) and The Love Race (1932) are being shown in the cinema. Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:54, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: If that's the case, then I am withdrawing this DR per {{PD-UK-unknown}} (source country is UK). Many thanks to Secondarywaltz for providing info. ★ Poké95 05:45, 21 October 2016 (UTC) (non-admin closure)
Salvador Dalí has not been dead for at least 70 years. jdx Re: 16:34, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:52, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
저작권 침해 (Copyright violations) http://apinkstudio.com/491 -- 메이 `토론 16:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:51, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
저작권침해(Copyright violations) http://www.stardailynews.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=93368 -- 메이 `토론 17:00, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:51, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
저작권 침해(Copyright violations) http://apinkgarden.com/xe/apink/862 http://i.imgur.com/8Mz0s6k.jpg -- 메이 `토론 17:08, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:51, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
저작권 침해(Copyright violations) http://apinkgarden.com/xe/apink/854, http://i.imgur.com/h3DeoBC.jpg -- 메이 `토론 17:10, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:51, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by ISFD Santo Domingo 2016 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Images of unknown copyright status copied from the internet and uploaded as "own work". Probable copyright violations.
- File:Empandas de carne.jpg
- File:Collage comidas.jpg
- File:Asado Argentino.jpg
- File:Carbonada criolla.jpg
Takeaway (talk) 23:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination (found elsewhere on the web and unlikely to be own work). (t) Josve05a (c) 01:18, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
No source. Copyright situation cannot be determined. Who is the photographer? When did he/she die? Jcb (talk) 23:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: has been resolved in the meantime. --Jcb (talk) 07:30, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
No source, no permission. Author is stated to be some 'Boerkevitz' Jcb (talk) 22:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Call someone "some Boerkevitz" is not very kind, Boerkevitz is a registered wikipedian (https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gebruiker:Boerkevitz). As far as I remember, (2007 is long ago) this photo was on the dutch wikipedia article about the River Samber, when photos more often were on national files, and not always in Commons. I probably transferred it to Commons, I wouldn't take an oath on it, after almost ten years. Looking at his discussion page, Boerkevitz keeps on being active and so he is since the early beginnings in 2005. So before being overzealous in erasing, JCB, be so kind and ask Boerkevitz. He speaks dutch, so it shall not be difficult to understand each other. In this early wikipedian times, people were not always formal downloading pictures. If there is an author, it is the source, i don't understand why this picture should be erased.--Flamenc (talk) 13:01, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, I found the user and I found the original upload, where an 'own work' claim was made. So everything seems fine now. Jcb (talk) 13:13, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: resolved. --Jcb (talk) 13:13, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete Boxizel (talk) 04:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: ununsed file freshly uploaded nominated by uploader. --JuTa 16:40, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
unreasonable intrusion Ата (talk) 07:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Probably swiped from http://www.kids-models.ru/profile.php?id=56e20d6515f58. Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:56, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --lNeverCry 09:02, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by ISFD Santo Domingo (talk · contribs)
[edit]Images of unknown copyright status copied from the internet and uploaded as "own work". Probable copyright violations.
- File:Collage comida.jpg
- File:Dulceiris.jpg
- File:Empanadasiris.jpg
- File:Carbonadairis.jpg
- File:Pastelitosiris.png
- File:Asadoiris.jpg
Takeaway (talk) 23:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 09:02, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
I authored this derivative work when I was a child under my real name. I would like to remove the derivative as it is both low quality and of little use, and for professional privacy reasons. Anythingbut (talk) 05:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Info The image is currently used. But I think, the author can reupload it with appropriate description and then request deletion of the older version (or just its description). Ankry (talk) 15:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Resolved per ticket:2016102010003446. FDMS 4 14:20, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Insho Domoto died in 1975. Heir(s) permission is needed.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:33, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: clear case, uploader removed an incorrect license himself. --JuTa 01:31, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
We do not keep personal art created by non-notable artists. See COM:SCOPE. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 10:52, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
COM:DW, the girl on the flag is above COM:TOO. OTRS permission from the designer of the flag is needed. ★ Poké95 03:20, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --lNeverCry 08:13, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
No source. Missing authorship information. According to uploader, author has 'long deceased', but the question is: How long? Jcb (talk) 22:36, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- This file should have been licensed under the following tag -
|
This work was first published in South Africa and is now in the public domain because its copyright protection has expired by virtue of the Copyright Act No. 98 of 1978, amended 2002. The work meets one of the following criteria:
A South African work that is in the public domain in South Africa according to this rule is in the public domain in the U.S. only if it was in the public domain in South Africa in 1996, e.g. if it was published before 1946 and no copyright was registered in the U.S. (This is the effect of 17 USC 104A with its critical date of January 1, 1996.) |
 |
Kept: resolved. --Jcb (talk) 15:28, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
auteur mort en 1972, sans liberté de panorama en France 90.43.133.13 00:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
auteur mort en 1972, sans liberté de panorama en France 90.43.133.13 00:05, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
auteur mort en 1972, sans liberté de panorama en France 90.43.133.13 00:06, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
auteur mort en 1972, sans liberté de panorama en France 90.43.133.13 00:06, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
auteur mort en 1972, sans liberté de panorama en France 90.43.133.13 00:08, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
auteur mort en 1972, 90.43.133.13 00:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Werbung /Advertisment Foreign Species (talk) 00:39, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused non-photographic JPEG, superseded by PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 00:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:26, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Pascal Recherche (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, it appears.
- File:Stiftungslogo.png
- File:Satzung der Jürgen-Höller-Stiftung.pdf
- File:Anerkennungsurkunde Jürgen Höller Stiftung.jpg
Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Pascal Recherche (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused documents of questionable notability.
- File:Wachstums Champion 2017.pdf
- File:Wachstums Champion 2017 Human Resources.pdf
- File:Top Coach 2016.pdf
- File:Wachstums Champion 2016.pdf
- File:Wachstums Champion 2016 Human Resources.pdf
- File:Satzung der Jürgen Höller Stiftung vom 30.04.2013.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:47, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:15, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Incorrect license, unclear use. See COM:EDUSE. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:15, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unclear use. See COM:EDUSE. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:15, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by KRXworldWIDE (talk · contribs)
[edit]Self-made album. See COM:SCOPE.
- File:12. KRx - Lump Of Curb (Prd. By Masterminds).wav
- File:10. KRx - R.O.Y. (Ride On You) (Prd. By Chris Prythm).wav
- File:13. Outro.wav
- File:11. (Interlude 5) Shockstar.wav
- File:08. KRx - Rap Carnivore (Prd. By Mean SK).wav
- File:09. (Interlude 4) Crypt.wav
- File:06. KRx - Everybody (Prd. By ELF).wav
- File:04. KRx - Leanin' (Doin That Shit) (Prd. By Mean SK).wav
- File:07. (Interlude 3) Bop Til You Drop.wav
- File:05. (Interlude 2) - Twas The Night Before Christmas.wav
- File:02. KRx - Been In It For A Minute (Slow Down) (Prd. By Motabeatz).wav
- File:03. (Interlude 1) - Mirror, Mirror.wav
- File:01. Intro.wav
Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:17, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused non-photographic JPEG; superseded by PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 02:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Spam Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:28, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused non-photographic JPEG, superseded by PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 02:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Incorrectly licensed. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Incorrectly licensed. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Incorrectly licensed Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused non-photographic JPEG, superseded by PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 02:41, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Delete, didn't see you re-uploaded it as a PNG, I at first thought you were referring to File:Seal of Napa County, California.png above. ɱ (talk) 03:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused, superseded by an SVG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 02:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Advertising, I think. See COM:SCOPE. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:03, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:07, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused, duplicate of this SVG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 04:56, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
out of scope Bodhisattwa (talk) 05:15, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
This is a problematic interpretation of a graph. It has no explanation of its x and y axes and only depicts the frequency distribution curves, omitting crucial data that is included in the original graph. The description of the graph oversimplifies its relation to sexual dimorphism, misrepresenting conclusions from the original study. Gobōnobo + c 05:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by JuTa as no source (No source since)
The subject was born in 1927. So the rest of the claims make no sense. Fæ (talk) 05:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by JuTa as no source (No source since)
The subject was born in 1892, with the photograph most likely to have been taken between 1921 and 1930. Unknown photographer. Fæ (talk) 05:32, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: per Fæ. --lNeverCry 08:44, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
The depicted prominent advertisement poster is clearly above TOO and due to its likely non-permanent installation, it's hardly covered by Czech republic's FoP provision. -- Túrelio (talk) 06:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Regrettably, Taiwan/ROC has FoP exception only for buildings. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Regrettably, Taiwan/ROC has FoP exception only for buildings. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:02, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
File is small, and no EXIF data is provided, I doubt that the Flickr user is the copyright holder of this file. ★ Poké95 07:31, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
out of scope, spam, del. on DE Nolispanmo 07:33, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Low technical quality. Have File:Dimethylacetylene.png that is same level of detail DMacks (talk) 07:37, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
I fear, these wooden sculpture have some originality above TOO and thereby might be copyrighted. Regrettably, Russia has no FoP exception for such works. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:37, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Chemically imposslble. Either the triple-bond should be between the central to carbons or several of the H are on the wrong C. Category:Butynes has lots of styles and formats of both 1- and 2-butyne. DMacks (talk) 07:40, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused, non-photographic JPEG. Superseded by PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 07:47, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused non-photographic JPEG, superseded by PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 07:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused, non-photographic JPEG. Superseded by PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 08:00, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:29, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Jenny Nyström
[edit]- File:Kvinna_i_bahytt_(Jenny_Nyström)_-_Nationalmuseum_-_132639.tif
- File:Konvalescenten_(Jenny_Nyström)_-_Nationalmuseum_-_177823.tif
- File:Old_French_Countrywoman_(Jenny_Nyström)_-_Nationalmuseum_-_25495.tif
- File:Portrait_of_a_Boy_(Jenny_Nyström)_-_Nationalmuseum_-_23465.tif
This was a miscalculation on the part of the batch upload (meaning me+museum), en:Jenny Nyström died in 1946 so these images are not free until 1st January 2017. André Costa (WMSE) (talk) 08:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Also File:Jultomten 1893.jpg (not from the batch upload). /André Costa (WMSE) (talk) 08:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- And in addition to Jenny Nyström I also found the following images where the artist only died in 1946 but which still made it into the batch upload:
- Apologies for that. /André Costa (WMSE) (talk) 08:23, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
- Undeleted Now PD-Old. /Lokal_Profil 11:40, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Unused non-photographic JPEG that has been superseded by a PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 08:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused non-photographic JPEG, superseded by a PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 08:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused, non-photographic JPEG, superseded by a PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 08:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused non-photographic JPEG, superseded by a PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 08:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Dubious license - please document Palnatoke (talk) 08:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused non-photographic JPEG, superseded by a PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 08:34, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused non-photographic JPEG, superseded by a PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 08:40, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Superseded by PNG. Unused. Non-photographic JPEG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 08:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused, superseded by PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 09:08, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused, superseded by PNG. Non-photographic JPEG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 09:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused, non-photographic JPEG. Superseded by a PNG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 09:20, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Photo of a modern model car from a German company. Being a non-utilitarian object, the model is not exempt from copyright like the car itself would be. See User:Elcobbola/Models for a thorough summary. Storkk (talk) 09:40, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:31, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by JuTa as no source (No source since)
Apparently tinted photograph, taken 1923 to 1926 as it would have been an 'official' popular photograph when becoming The Jathedar of Akal Takht. Unknown photographer so the PD license is appropriate, unless there is some proof otherwise. Fæ (talk) 09:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: per Fæ. --lNeverCry 08:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by JuTa as no source (No source since)
Photograph most likely to have been taken in 1993, shortly before the subject's death. Not widely used in terms of internet footprint, but an apparent scan of a print. Fæ (talk) 09:54, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
No EXIF, small size, black border, all suggest that this is not the uploader's own work as claimed.. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:14, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
The lack of EXIF (metadata) could stem from the fact that this picture is edited in pixlr, befunky or some other online photoediting software. The photo was in fact taken by me with my iphone, it´s the building where i lived 2012-2013. It is no matter of life and death, but i see no immediate reason to why the photo should be removed. (Docentballhorn) (talk to me) 14:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC+1)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Definitely not an "own work of uploader in 2016" since the person died in 1936. Previously published e.g. at http://oko-planet.su/history/historysng/page,2,184063-vtoraya-mirovaya-1935-1935-vtoraya-italo-efiopskaya-voyna.html. Regarding possibility of the photo to still retain as a free content: according ti the info at provided link, the photo was made in Marseille (France), thus can be discussed under French copyright laws. However I don't know anything yet about its authorship and date of 1st publication. Tatewaki (talk) 10:34, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
I have doubts whether our uploader Ali Limonadi is this Ali Limonadi who directed the movie with Ensslin and took this picture. And that he specially for this created an account on wiki, and uploaded this one image only. And as we are talking about recognizable image or a quite famous person, shouldn't we ask for additional clarifications (OTRS permission)? Masur (talk) 10:34, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Non-photographic JPEG. Superseded by PNG. Unused on any articles. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 10:50, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:32, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Small photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. I suspect copyright violation. File description is misleading. Taivo (talk) 11:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:33, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Depicted person isn't mentioned neither in en:William Bryant nor in en:BTK. Self-promotion of non-notable person, out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 11:40, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:33, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Depicted person isn't mentioned neither in en.wiki nor in es.wiki. Self-promotion of non-notable person, out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 11:42, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:33, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Small, low-quality personal image not in use, no potential educational value. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 12:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:33, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Uploader claims the image is in the public domain due to it being "simple geometry". However, the image looks to be complex enough to meet the threshold of originality for copyright in the US and elsewhere. Psychonaut (talk) 18:50, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
- Definitely too simple for the US, it's a torch and letters.
Keep Fry1989 eh? 01:21, 12 April 2013 (UTC) - Delete As per Psychonaut, the logo has sufficient creativity. The left and right sides of the letters form a round outer shape of the logo while a torch is positioned in the centre whose two legs are connected to the both letters.
- the above comment was made by Nightingale on 2013-05-10UTC20:55 --Nightingale (talk) 02:42, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
- Insufficient. Connecting letters is still too simple for the US. Fry1989 eh? 17:53, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Does not meet threshold of originality FASTILY 08:23, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
This may or may not be below the realtively high Threshold of Originality in the USA as argued above, but it is certainly well above the ToO in many countries. Since we do not know the ToO in North Korea -- indeed, we do not know if there is any case law on the subject -- COM:PRP requires us to assume that the ToO is relatively low and that this has a copyright. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:49, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Delete. Despite the previous close, I think this crosses the threshold of originality even in the United States. At least, I've seen similar images here deleted for the same reason. —Psychonaut (talk) 12:10, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:33, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:33, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Danderson527 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical newspapers, photo and document. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
- File:Capital Guardian article.pdf
- File:Amazing Stories.pdf
- File:Lt. Col. Norvel L. R. Lee (Retired).jpg
- File:S3009278416101216100-page-001.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:28, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:33, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Looks like modern reprint of old book. Will be good idea to find historical publication. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- @INeverCry: This is a holy scripture in public domain and due to its unique nature, there are no spelling differences in various versions. We are working to bring a digitized version of this scripture but currently we would like this version to be restored so that we can keep transcribing it on Wikisource.--Satdeep Gill (talk) 06:04, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Satdeep Gill: I don't know how I missed that ping on the talk page. I've restored it. lNeverCry 06:16, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- @INeverCry: Thanks a lot for all the support. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 07:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
Modern art. I think artist identity/permission confirmation via Commons:OTRS is necessary. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:36, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Modern art. I think artist identity/permission confirmation via Commons:OTRS is necessary. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:37, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
No Commons:Freedom of panorama in USA for sculptures. Who and when created it? EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:39, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:40, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:41, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:42, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:42, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from book covers. Should be cropped/blamked to keep.
- File:Martha Esperanza 93419571054.jpg
- File:Martha Esperanza Ramos 13154.jpg
- File:Martha Esperanza.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:46, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Non-photographic JPEG, unused and superseded by SVG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 14:47, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
- File:Great Hall at City College of New York 8.jpg
- File:Great Hall at City College of New York 5.jpg
- File:Great Hall at City College of New York 4.jpg
- File:Great Hall at City College of New York 3.jpg
- File:Great Hall at City College of New York 1.jpg
- File:Great Hall at City College of New York 2.jpg
- File:L'EYE'brary Rockefeller University Library.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:48, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused non-photographic JPEG, superseded by an SVG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 14:48, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused non-photographic JPEG, superseded by an SVG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 14:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
File:"Austin, Texas" mural on Guadalupe Street, north of the University of Texas at Austin LCCN2014632161.tif
[edit]No evidence that the underlying mural is either PD or freely licensed. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Syed Arslan Ahmed Arsal (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos and documents. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
- File:Hazrat karmanawal shareef.png
- File:Hazrat karmanwal.png
- File:1q s qasim.jpg
- File:S m q r.jpg
- File:Qasim Rajourvi.jpg
- File:Signature Haji Baba.jpg
- File:Shajra e nasab.jpg
- File:Kayyan shareef.jpg
- File:Kaluchak sharif.jpg
- File:عرس مبارک.jpg
- File:4دربار نورپورسیدا.jpg
- File:5۔ سید محمد عبداللہ شاہ آزادؒ.jpg
- File:Haji baba and Fida Rajourvi.jpg
- File:Haji Baba and Larvi sb.png
- File:3.1سید نوران شاہ.jpg
- File:2۔ پیر سید حبیب اللہ شاہ ضیاء شورش جبالیؒ.jpg
- File:پیر سید محمد قاسم راجوروی کی کتب کی فہرست.jpg
- File:Pir Syed Muhammad Qasim Rajorvi.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:52, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Moulderkurt.5 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Mexican soldier 0387.jpg
- File:Mexican soldiers 23.jpg
- File:Mexican soldiers093.jpg
- File:Mexican soldiers092.jpg
- File:Operating Mexican military 2.jpg
- File:Mexican soldier 01.jpg
- File:Mexican military column.jpg
- File:Narco mantas.png
- File:Salomone Leclercq0.jpg
- File:Salomone Leclercq4.jpg
- File:Pons exit.jpg
- File:Collage Swimming.jpg
- File:Russia Alternative Games.jpg
- File:Opening ceremony of the Russia Alternative Games.jpg
- File:Joan Lluis Pons.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Aaroncato89 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
File:"Figure of Justice from U.S. Courthouse, Alexandria, Virginia" at Daniel Patrick Moynihan U.S. Courthouse, New York, New York LCCN2010720113.tif
[edit]This is a 1996 sculpture and therefore the image infringes on the sculptor's copyright. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete standard YouTube licence does not allow reuse and it looks like a crop from File:Album rihanna.png which is up for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Album rihanna.png too. Ww2censor (talk) 15:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:36, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Flag of the European Union.svg. Fry1989 eh? 16:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:36, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
It doesn't seem like the original uploader on frwiki was the photographer of the photo. Thus explicit permission permission is missing, Should we require a 2006 image to have explicit permission or is indirect permission enough? Basvb (talk) 17:15, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:36, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Uploaders private image gallery. Unused, out of project scope.
GeorgHH • talk 17:23, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:36, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
This image is a 1956 image from "family archives". Is the uploader the copyrightholder of the work or not? Basvb (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:37, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Too blurry, out of project scope due to bad quality. Taivo (talk) 18:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:37, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
This is routine request for small photo without metadata. Is the uploader really the photographer? Why the photo is so small? Can you upload a bigger version, for example, 2000×1500 pixels? Can you upload a version with EXIF data? This is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 18:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:37, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
File was clearly not created by the author who uploaded it. A google search shows this same image used in multiple locations. The metadata shows it was last edited in Photoshop, likely to remove watermarks. Zackmann08 (talk) 18:36, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:37, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Private image. Unused, out of project scope. GeorgHH • talk 18:47, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:37, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Wikiakashchetan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope. Commons is no private web host to keep your photos.
- File:Nice one cutie.jpg
- File:How cute.jpg
- File:Lucky.png
- File:Nice one.jpg
- File:Wow cute.jpg
- File:Akash chetan.jpg
Achim (talk) 18:58, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:37, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
out of scope: this is not "Sparrows Point, Maryland" and we have enough photos of sparrows here 2003:D2:1BCC:BC2D:9730:6D29:CA64:16EE 19:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:37, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
The metadata states the author and copyright holder are "© Håkon Eikesdal". No evidence of permission is given. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 19:50, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:38, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Obviously copyrighted photo from the website linked. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 19:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:38, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Files of User:Menanddreamsinthedhauladhar
[edit]- File:Modern indian writers in english literature.jpg
- File:List of indian authors and their books.jpg
- File:Contemporary indian writers in english literature.jpg
- File:Indian writing in english.jpg
- File:Indian writers in english literature and their works.jpg
- File:Indian writing in english,Men and Dreams in the Dhauladhar.jpg
Self-promotion. They are also all violations of various copyrights: book covers, advertisements, and publications. --Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 20:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:39, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Files of User:Leema Dhar
[edit]- File:Leema Dhar, being the distinguished Judge at Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology, Allahabad.jpg
- File:Leema Dhar giving her Key note Speech at MNNIT Cultural Fest AVISKAR 2014(1).png
- File:Leema Dhar giving her Key note Speech at MNNIT Cultural Fest AVISKAR 2014(2).jpg
- File:Author LEEMA DHAR.jpg
- File:Indian Author LEEMA DHAR with the Book Cover of her Fifth Novel.jpg
The user uploaded several pictures of herself but does not credit any photographer or give them a chance to license their work. In the last image she includes the cover of her book, which is likely copyrighted by the publisher. --Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 20:20, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Not a USGS map, there is a clear copyright statement from 'Maps a la carte, Inc.' in the upper left corner Jcb (talk) 20:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
As with many such things, either this is a copyright violation or it is made up by the uploader and is thererfore out of scope for having no educational purpose. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused personal image. Only contribution of this uploader. While we allow active contributors to upload one or two personal images for their user page, "active" and "contributor" must come first.
This is not the image with the smae filename that was deleted in 2104. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
I can't read the watermark and Google doesn't find the image, but I doubt very much that this new uploader was actually the photographer as claimed. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:33, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
No source, incorrect license Jcb (talk) 21:33, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:42, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
unused personal images : out of scope
Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:37, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:40, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Ho sbagliato a scrivere l'autore, ho scritto Tintoretto invece di Bronzino. Qulacuno può aiutarmi e correggerlo per favore? Manuelarosi (talk) 22:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Is this file ok in regards to it being a derivative work (see COM:Derivative) of both the phone and the background image on the phone? Basvb (talk) 22:37, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
What is the copyright situation of money from Cyprus? Not listed in Commons:Currency Jcb (talk) 22:48, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
No source. Who took the picture of this 3D object? Probably not own work, rather grabbed from the web. Jcb (talk) 22:50, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
could it be allowed according to the PD-LithuaniaGov, if not, lots of pics of the Lietuvos coins should be deleted--Baomi (talk) 08:29, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
No source. Who took the picture of this 3D object? Probably not own work, rather grabbed from the web. Jcb (talk) 22:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
No source. Where does the included paprika picture come from? Jcb (talk) 22:52, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
- Restored: as per [1]. Yann (talk) 23:39, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Sadly, there is no Freedom of Panorama for sculptures in the United States, so the sculpture still retains copyright even on photographs. Kaldari (talk) 23:54, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 22:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/User:Akash chetan
Out of scope - unused personal image lNeverCry 00:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Fredman avalos (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
lNeverCry 01:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image lNeverCry 01:05, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
no COM:EDUSE - severe sun flare lNeverCry 01:06, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Linkstrummerfan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
- File:Linkstrummerbirthday2016.jpg
- File:LINK STRUMMER ANNOUNCES NEW PROJECT.jpg
- File:LinkStrummerBirthday2016.jpg
- File:Link Strummer POSES ON A ROCKǃǃ.jpg
- File:Link Strummer performing 'Barriers'.jpg
- File:LinkStrummer.jpg
lNeverCry 01:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ashok koori (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
- File:A ak.jpg
- File:Ashok koori in love.jpg
- File:Ashok koori.jpg
- File:Ashok koori with friends.jpg
- File:Ashok koori by chandan.jpg
lNeverCry 01:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
per COM:ADVERT
- File:Key-Cybersecurity-logo.png
- File:Web Designing.png
- File:ALL Project.png
- File:Ethical Hacking.png
- File:Android Development.png
- File:Programming C java.png
- File:IITCA.png
- File:IITCA LOGO.png
lNeverCry 01:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by EngageTheBand (talk · contribs)
[edit]per COM:ADVERT
- File:COLLAGE.jpg
- File:Engage band shot.jpg
- File:Kirk Justin Bryan Anthony.jpg
- File:Engage Blk Green Transparent.png
- File:Engage at the Brighton Bar.jpg
lNeverCry 01:33, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:44, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image lNeverCry 01:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:44, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
per COM:PACKAGING lNeverCry 01:38, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:44, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image lNeverCry 01:42, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:44, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal images
lNeverCry 01:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:44, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image lNeverCry 01:44, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image lNeverCry 01:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image lNeverCry 01:47, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image lNeverCry 01:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image lNeverCry 01:54, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image lNeverCry 01:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image lNeverCry 01:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Atuladohei (talk · contribs)
[edit]Possible copyright violations - small sizes - no EXIF - own work claim doubtful
lNeverCry 02:00, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
IMHO above Com:TOO. Yeah, it's writing but with gradients that are not easy to reproduce. Fair use possible. Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 04:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Please see Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#File:GianaSisters.jpg. This file was deleted due to being above COM:TOO, but was restored since it is below TOO. And I agree IMHO that this is below TOO. --★ Poké95 05:36, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep The lettering was create with Photoshop, no hardcopy or similar! --KenzoMogi (talk) 15:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Question This is not the original logo but fan art? Sorry, I really can't remember how the logo looked like in '87 --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:12, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- If modern music can now be converted to 8-bit, then how can't logos? ★ Poké95 05:37, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: I find this once, among many others, at Google images so I think it is not fan art. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:32, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
File:Grande Expediente - Homenagem às vítimas de Hiroshima e Nagasaki 08-08-2016 (28236252284).jpg
[edit]This file was initially tagged as no license (No license since). CC0 and PDM 1.0 are different, since CC0 is a legal tool, while PDM is just a mark (not a legal tool). PDM must not be used to release files to the public domain, since it has no legal effect. So this image remains copyrighted. The Legislative Assembly of Parana should be asked to relicense all their files under CC0 to be truly in the public domain. ★ Poké95 09:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- also, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mara Lima em 2012.jpg (from same Flickr User [2]) --Benzoyl (talk) 12:11, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Pokéfan95 as no license (No license since). CC0 and PDM 1.0 are different, since CC0 is a legal tool, while PDM is just a mark (not a legal tool). PDM must not be used to release files to the public domain, since it has no legal effect. So this image remains copyrighted. The Legislative Assembly of Parana should be asked to relicense all their files under CC0 to be truly in the public domain. ★ Poké95 09:02, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Jcb as no source (No source since)
This is a well used photograph by an unknown photographer (none is apparent after browsing usage). Based on apparent age in the photograph, this was most likely to have been taken between 1840-1860. Keep unless there is some evidence that the photographer is known. Fæ (talk) 09:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
The displayed person died in 1879 aged 72. This photo shows a younger man, maybe in his fifties. While I am not happy having uploaded a file without a proper source almost a decade ago, I see no point in deleting it as this is definitely PD-old because of its age. --Polarlys (talk) 18:03, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: It's beyond a significant doubtthat the photographer died before 1946. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:36, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
No source. Invalid license, cts.edu is not from the federal government. Jcb (talk) 11:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: While the window is PD, the claim that somehow this was taken by a USA Federal employee is ridiculous. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
spam, out of scope, del on DE Nolispanmo 15:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:36, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1634 - 1640, 1650 - 1721.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: Not a reason to delete -- next time uyou do a mass delete, use VFC -- it's much faster for you and the closing Admin. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:37, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1634 - 1640, 1650 - 1721.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:37, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1721 - 1743.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:14, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:37, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1721 - 1743.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:15, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:37, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1747 - 1776.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:16, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:37, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1747 - 1776.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:16, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:37, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1776 - 1809.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:17, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:37, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1812 - 1831.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:18, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:37, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1831 - 1833.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:18, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:37, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1921.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1938 - 1940.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1945 - 1947.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:20, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1960 - 1997.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1960 - 1997.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1997 - 2009.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1634 - 1640, 1650 - 1721.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1776 - 1809.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1831 - 1833.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1938 - 1940.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1945 - 1947.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1960 - 1997.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1960 - 1997.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:27, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1960 - 1997.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:28, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1960 - 1997.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1960 - 1997.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1960 - 1997.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1960 - 1997.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1960 - 1997.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:31, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1960 - 1997.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:31, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1960 - 1997.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:31, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1634 - 1640, 1650 - 1721.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:49, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1640 - 1641.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:49, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1641 - 1642.svg Mapsed (talk) 15:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1642 - 1646.svg Mapsed (talk) 16:01, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1647 - 1648.svg Mapsed (talk) 16:02, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1648 - 1650.svg Mapsed (talk) 16:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1634 - 1640, 1650 - 1721.svg Mapsed (talk) 16:05, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1721 - 1743.svg Mapsed (talk) 16:05, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1743 - 1747.svg Mapsed (talk) 16:06, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1747 - 1776.svg Mapsed (talk) 16:07, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1776 - 1809.svg Mapsed (talk) 16:07, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1809 - 1812.svg Mapsed (talk) 16:08, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1812 - 1831.svg Mapsed (talk) 16:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1831 - 1833.svg Mapsed (talk) 16:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1833 - 1918.svg Mapsed (talk) 16:10, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1641 - 1642.svg
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1642 - 1646.svg
Vector version available File:Provinces of Finland 1647 - 1648.svg Mapsed (talk) 16:18, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Erreur dans la dénomination du fichier Andreal90 (talk) 18:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Delete the Category:Apex (1990) and all 48 images within the category. Images are copyrighted. The colophon page clearly states: "All rights of reproduction are reserved without the written permission of the board". Snek 01 16 October 2016
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:14, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
EXIF data says: U.S. Navy photo courtesy of General Dynamics, Bath Iron Works/Released. I looked up the EXIF data before but did not find the "courtesy of". Sorry. Cobatfor (talk) 22:46, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:12, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Unused plain text file, and as such out of scope. If relevant plain text files should be integrated directly into the Wikimedia projects as text. If you feel that this file was incorrectly nominated please respond. Also source issues Basvb (talk) 17:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep，from m:Wikimedia Macau--shizhao (talk) 00:37, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: per shizhao. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
finding it difficult to post on required page. Will try a different method. Please delete it for now. Kraj01 (talk) 18:08, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
[[Category:{{subst:delete2|image=File:IIT Dharwad inaguration.jpg]]
Deleted: I don't understand the reason given, but this is an obvious copyvio with no evidence of any permission. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:45, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
No FOP in Namibia Elisfkc (talk) 19:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose, The "copyright" if there is such thing of a building, has long expired. --Pgallert (talk) 07:41, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Pgallert: When was it built, who was the architect, and when did they die? Unless you can answer all of those and prove that it is past Nambiba's copyright length, then it can stay. Otherwise, per COM:PCP & Freedom of Panorama (which is the copyright of a building), it should be deleted. Elisfkc (talk) 20:47, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Elisfkc: The church was built in 1857. And yes, whoever designed it is 50 years dead by now, for if they had still been alive in 1966... I think you follow me. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 07:40, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Pgallert: When was it built, who was the architect, and when did they die? Unless you can answer all of those and prove that it is past Nambiba's copyright length, then it can stay. Otherwise, per COM:PCP & Freedom of Panorama (which is the copyright of a building), it should be deleted. Elisfkc (talk) 20:47, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: 1857 building. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:48, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Insufficient information to determine copyright situation. Not 'own work', but DW Jcb (talk) 21:15, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Are you really accusing Arch - our most productive COA-artist when it comes to Dutch heraldics - of uploading derivative works which are copyright violations? Natuur12 (talk) 21:18, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Indeed a 'derivative work'... of a coat of arms granted in 1745. https://books.google.com/books?id=ia3rXmIzhJcC&pg=PA79#v=onepage&q&f=false Reventtalk 21:32, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- The presentation of the coat of arms doesn't seem to date from 1745. An external source is mentioned in the upload log, clearly suggesting that the first upload comes from an external source and that the second upload is a DW by Arch from the first upload. Jcb (talk) 21:38, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Arch only uses the drawings from the Hoge Raad van Adel and only uses the lions, escucheons and such, that he himself has created. The drawings from the HRvA are allways different to what Arch made himself. So I oppose deletion. Dqfn13 (talk) 14:49, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- The presentation of the coat of arms doesn't seem to date from 1745. An external source is mentioned in the upload log, clearly suggesting that the first upload comes from an external source and that the second upload is a DW by Arch from the first upload. Jcb (talk) 21:38, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: Since Arch uses his or her own "palette" of objects, I see no copyvio here regardless of the status of the source. This is like paraphrasing a text saying the same thing with different words, which is also legal. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:57, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
No source. No authorship information, so that copyright situation cannot be determined. Jcb (talk) 21:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:12, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
No source. No authorship information, no 'own work' statement. Jcb (talk) 22:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:10, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
No source, no permission. Jcb (talk) 22:31, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:09, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
No source provided to show this comes from the NGA Jcb (talk) 22:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: The same satellite image (with different overlay) appeara at File:GR-A6_course.png credited to NASA. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:01, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
copyright problem affecting all firefox logos Reseletti (talk) 22:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: THe Firefox logo license situationis a morass. The current rule is clearly NC. "You may make t-shirts, desktop wallpaper, or baseball caps with Mozilla Marks on them, though only for yourself and your friends (meaning people from whom you don't receive anything of value in return). You can't put the Mozilla Mark(s) on anything that you produce commercially (whether or not you make a profit) -- at least not without receiving Mozilla's written permission.". . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:08, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
- Restored: as per [3]. Yann (talk) 23:39, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Cstevencampbell (talk · contribs)
[edit]COM:DW of models, product packaging, and printed materials (e.g. File:AMT57TBird.jpg) See User:Elcobbola/Models for rationale and precedent DRs.
- File:MercurySpeedyFordGT.jpg
- File:MercuryChaparralGasCap.jpg
- File:MercuryChaparral2F.jpg
- File:BritainsHowitzer.jpg
- File:HuskyJaguarFire.jpg
- File:TootsietoySafari.jpg
- File:MPCMonzaFront.jpg
- File:MPC1977MonzaSide.jpg
- File:TootsietoyCheetah.jpg
- File:ClownImage1930s.jpg
- File:FunHoExcavator.jpg
- File:MaistoFerrari550Maranello.jpg
- File:ModelPorsche.jpg
- File:MebetoysPorsche924.jpg
- File:ProgettoKFerrari225interior.jpg
- File:ProgettoKFerrari225front.jpg
- File:ProgettoKFerrari225box.jpg
- File:ProgettoKBirdcage.jpg
- File:GamdaBarracudaRear.jpg
- File:GamdaBarracudaBase.jpg
- File:GamdaChryslersCompared.jpg
- File:GamdaChrysler.jpg
- File:GamdaKoorBarracuda.jpg
- File:RemcoRecyclingTruck.jpg
- File:WinrossWhiteCab.jpg
- File:TraxValiantChargerRear.jpg
- File:TraxValiantCharger.jpg
- File:TopGearHoldenNewspaper.jpg
- File:TraxFalconCobra.jpg
- File:EfsiCommerVan.jpg
- File:KadenTatraT613.jpg
- File:R.W.ModellKommissbrot.jpg
- File:TomicaToyota2000GTbase.jpg
- File:TootsietoyHardbodyGTX.jpg
- File:TootsietoyCountach.jpg
- File:Cigar Box Lola.jpg
- File:MebetoysInnocentiSkis.jpg
- File:TomteLaerdalChassis.jpg
- File:TomteLaerdalPickup.jpg
- File:SafirHK1898Peugeot.jpg
- File:SafirHK1898PeugeotWheel.jpg
- File:Safir1898PanhardChassis.jpg
- File:Safir1898Panhard.jpg
- File:BudgieToysCommerREA.jpg
- File:MorestoneCoach.jpg
- File:MPC1977Dodge.jpg
- File:BarclaySportsCars.jpg
- File:BarclayBeerTruck.jpg
- File:SablonNacoralWheel.jpg
- File:SablonNSUro80front.jpg
- File:SablonNSUro80Side.jpg
- File:FranklinMintMetroEngine.jpg
- File:FranklinMintMetro.jpg
- File:FranklinMintHarleySoftail.jpg
- File:MarxFordJType.jpg
- File:EfsiSafeway.jpg
- File:SikuWhitewall.jpg
- File:SikuSuperMunchenBus.jpg
- File:SikuMiniSign.jpg
- File:SikuVTempoMatador.jpg
- File:SikuVFordTransit.jpg
- File:LledoChevPennzoil.jpg
- File:LledoAustinDrPepper.jpg
- File:MebetoysInnocentiChassis.jpg
- File:LledoDoubleBus2.jpg
- File:DuguCisitaliaFront.jpg
- File:DuguCisitaliaBox.jpg
- File:AuburnPlymouthAirport.jpg
- File:AMT59EdselWarp.jpg
- File:WesternAston.jpg
- File:EfsiFordTow.jpg
- File:ConradFreightlinerDetail.jpg
- File:ConradFreightliner.jpg
- File:RevellMaxwell.jpg
- File:JouefFerrariP41a.jpg
- File:TeknoMonza.jpg
- File:LonestarImpyCorsairFire.jpg
- File:PilenFIATTrunk1.jpg
- File:DinkyDesotoFireflite.jpg
- File:RevellGoggomobilT250deluxe.jpg
- File:RevellGoggomobilT250basic.jpg
- File:KadenWheel.jpg
- File:KovapVWVans.jpg
- File:MinichampsWartburg311a.jpg
- File:CigarboxAurora.jpg
- File:DinkyTank.jpg
- File:MiniluxeBMW1500.jpg
- File:PilenGhibli.jpg
- File:PilenMonteverdiHai.jpg
- File:PilenCitroenDS.jpg
- File:DinkyMonteverdi375L.jpg
- File:SchucoPiccoloMercedesBus.jpg
- File:Bburago57Testarossa.jpg
- File:NorevAtlasSMPresident.jpg
- File:MajoretteLandRover.jpg
- File:EligorChrysler.jpg
- File:BrummW125.jpg
- File:MarxHudsonFire.jpg
- File:PolistilMorgan.jpg
- File:NorevDauphine.jpg
- File:MinialuxeRenault1910.jpg
- File:MinialuxeCitroen.jpg
- File:BburagoDinoNew.jpg
- File:BburagoMaseratiRear.jpg
- File:SpotOnRoverWheel.jpg
- File:SpotOnMGPB.jpg
- File:RIOLincolnDiorama.jpg
- File:DCMTBus.jpg
- File:Bburago300Cockpit.jpg
- File:Bburago300SL.jpg
- File:PMCFordRanchero.jpg
- File:PMCPlymouthChassis.jpg
- File:PMCPlymouthTaxi.jpg
- File:FunmateF1Car.jpg
- File:FunmateTorino.jpg
- File:PlayartPorsche914.jpg
- File:HubleyFordWagon.jpg
- File:BrooklinKaiserWheel.jpg
- File:BrooklinKaiser.jpg
- File:WinrossFordTanker.jpg
- File:Johan66Toronado.jpg
- File:AMT62Ford.jpg
- File:PlayartRoverPolice.jpg
- File:Cursor1923MercedesDiesel.jpg
- File:PolitoysMIsoRivolta.jpg
- File:StahlbergVolvo245detail.jpg
- File:StahlbergVolvo245.jpg
- File:Hubley58Ford2.jpg
- File:Hubley58Ford.jpg
- File:JohanPlymouth.jpg
- File:VeremMaserati.jpg
- File:WinrossQuaker.jpg
- File:GeschaSmallBus.jpg
- File:LoneStarLondonTaxi.jpg
- File:EligorTriumphRear.jpg
- File:EligorTriumphTR5.jpg
- File:AuburnRancheroWindow.jpg
- File:AuburnCunningham.jpg
- File:AuburnRubberIndyRacer.jpg
- File:VitesseAustinHealey.jpg
- File:PolistilAlfasud.jpg
- File:Brumm47Jaguar.jpg
- File:RioCitroen.jpg
- File:AMT57TBird.jpg
- File:AMT59Mercury.jpg
- File:AUTOArtBugatti.jpg
- File:SchabakAudiAvant.jpg
- File:GamaSchucoAudi100.jpg
- File:GamaMinimodFiat.jpg
- File:SchucoBMWTurbo.jpg
- File:NorevRenault17.jpg
- File:Auto Art Saturn.jpg
- File:Mebetoys Innocenti.jpg
- File:Husky Triumph TR7.jpg
- File:Husky Studebaker Lark Wagonaires.jpg
- File:CorgiDaktari.jpg
- File:TomteCars.jpg
- File:StahlSAAB2.jpg
- File:PromoChevrear.jpg
- File:GalaniteSaab.jpg
- File:VitCaddyPanamerica2.jpg
Эlcobbola talk 19:36, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep File:DinkyTank.jpg and potentially others, on account of their age. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:34, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
- The Dinky Toys 151a was produced from 1937 to 1941, which is not nearly old enough to presume the author has been dead 70 years (UK is pma + 70). Similarly, an anonymous claim cannot be made without appropriate evidence, as not known to us does not mean not known to anyone. There's no reason this, or others, would be PD due to age. Эlcobbola talk 22:49, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
- Our practice, here and at en:WP, is that when reasonable (and the legal definition of "reasonable" is both the subject of first year law school essays, and met here) efforts to ascertain the designer are fruitless, then that may be considered anonymous. Accordingly the pre-war UK Dinky designs may be considered as PD. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:40, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- And what reasonable efforts have been made here? By all means, forward negative correspondence to COM:OTRS and we can certain retain images of the related works. Эlcobbola talk 14:49, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- None of the standard histories for Dinky record designers for these models of this era. Dinky themselves may have held records, but most of those were destroyed in the various shrinkages of the Binns Road factory site through the 1970s. I ought to know - it was our family that hauled much of the scrap off that site. I could even check Meccano's own filing cabinets for traces - I still have three of them in the workshop. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:03, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- And what reasonable efforts have been made here? By all means, forward negative correspondence to COM:OTRS and we can certain retain images of the related works. Эlcobbola talk 14:49, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- Our practice, here and at en:WP, is that when reasonable (and the legal definition of "reasonable" is both the subject of first year law school essays, and met here) efforts to ascertain the designer are fruitless, then that may be considered anonymous. Accordingly the pre-war UK Dinky designs may be considered as PD. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:40, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- The Dinky Toys 151a was produced from 1937 to 1941, which is not nearly old enough to presume the author has been dead 70 years (UK is pma + 70). Similarly, an anonymous claim cannot be made without appropriate evidence, as not known to us does not mean not known to anyone. There's no reason this, or others, would be PD due to age. Эlcobbola talk 22:49, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Considering the copyrighted creation vs. utilitarian subject argument, it just seems that there is no exploitation of creative license by posting a few examples of a toy in a Wikipedia article where no one is making money off of the subject matter. The picture is used for 'illustrative' purposes, not profiteering ones. It makes little sense to have articles on the subject, if the subject cannot be seen. Is there ANY leeway for 'fair use' here at all? --Cstevencampbell (talk) 22:17, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
- Also, I understand the law is different in different countries regarding portrayal of toys, so pictures of toys from France may be protected differently for pictures from toys from the United States, etc.--Cstevencampbell (talk) 22:24, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
- Your first comment is essentially an invocation of notions disallowed by COM:PRP; whether anyone is currently making money is not relevant. Images on the Commons must allow commercial exploitation if so desired. Fair use is also not allowed on the Commons - see COM:FU. All images on the Commons must comply with the laws of the US and the origin country, if different. (Because WMF servers are in the US.) Accordingly, it does not matter how other countries treat a given work if it is copyrightable in the US. Even some of the images here explicitly claim a copyright (see File:BritainsHowitzer.jpg - "copyright model"). Эlcobbola talk 22:49, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Si c'est des reproductions de modèles de voitures existantes. Supprimer si c'est des modèles originaux.--Classiccardinal (talk) 14:40, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- How do you reconcile this opinion with the information in this essay? Эlcobbola talk 14:49, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- Au cas par cas, pas en groupe. Désolé, je parle pas anglais, mais je vois pas comment admettre cette photo
et pas celle là File:MebetoysPorsche924.jpg. Ou alors on vire toute les photos de voitures.--Classiccardinal (talk) 19:33, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- C'est pas en dessous du Commons:Threshold of originality?--Classiccardinal (talk) 19:40, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- Au cas par cas, pas en groupe. Désolé, je parle pas anglais, mais je vois pas comment admettre cette photo
- How do you reconcile this opinion with the information in this essay? Эlcobbola talk 14:49, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per Classiccardinal --Benoît Prieur (d) 14:50, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- Canvassed at Commons:Bistro. Эlcobbola talk 14:52, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry, c'est interdit?--Classiccardinal (talk) 19:19, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- Canvassed at Commons:Bistro. Эlcobbola talk 14:52, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Elcobbola: Please avoid to insult intelligence of others ones. Please try to suppose the good faith of people who don't think like you. It is the minimum we can expect from an administrator. Thank you. --Benoît Prieur (d) 14:36, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Benoît Prieur: Please keep patronizing nonsense to yourself. Questioning one's objectivity is not questioning one's intellence. Clearly you believe (albeit wrongly) that these files are not copyvios; I have not said otherwise, which would be a failure of good faith. Read and think critically. Эlcobbola talk 19:10, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Elcobbola: Please avoid to insult intelligence of others ones. Please try to suppose the good faith of people who don't think like you. It is the minimum we can expect from an administrator. Thank you. --Benoît Prieur (d) 14:36, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep to be kept (example File:PromoChevrear.jpg) for the same reason of this discussion: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Scale_model_of_a_police_car_based_on_an_FSO_Warszawa_M20-57_or_200_of_Milicja_Obywatelska.jpg
- The verdict was: "the scale model has nothing added to the original car that meets the threshold of originality - the different overall size doesn't, the use of plastic instead of steel doesn't and the absence of an operational engine isn't even visible at the picture" --Arosio Stefano (talk) 14:28, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Models, being non-utilitarian, are not exempt from copyright in the same way as the object that they depict. I have tried to err on the side of caution, keeping those that may be PD per Andy Dingley, and those that just might fall under the COM:TOO (although this is very low in some countries, like the UK), or those for which Copyright registration would have had to be renewed (i.e. possible {{PD-US-not renewed}}). They should be re-nominated if I have kept them in error. None of the {{Vk}} arguments other than Andy Dingley's appear to even attempt following law or Commons policy, which elcobbola has summarized thoroughly at User:Elcobbola/Models. Failure to either address those points or argue why they should not apply renders ones {{Vk}} moot, remember that this is not a vote. Note that some of these may be uploadable to local wikis like English Wikipedia that allow for fair use. If assistance or temporary undeletion is needed for this purposes, that can be arranged. Storkk (talk) 09:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
US models that may be PD (or may not be)
[edit]This is a renomination of some that I did not delete when closing the previous DR... These are models, which as non-utilitarian objects are not exempt from copyright in the same way as the objects they represent (see User:Elcobbola/Models). These were made in the US, so may be PD due to copyright lapsing (see {{PD-US-no notice}} or {{PD-US-not renewed}}) - this would need to be ascertained for each before they can be kept. Storkk (talk) 10:46, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- File:RevellMaxwell.jpg
- File:RevellGoggomobilT250deluxe.jpg
- File:CigarboxAurora.jpg
- File:RevellGoggomobilT250basic.jpg
- File:PromoChevrear.jpg
- File:FranklinMintHarleySoftail.jpg
- File:MarxFordJType.jpg
- File:FranklinMintMetro.jpg
File:AMT59EdselWarp.jpg- File:TootsietoySafari.jpg
- File:TootsietoyCheetah.jpg
- File:BarclaySportsCars.jpg
- File:Cigar Box Lola.jpg
- File:BarclayBeerTruck.jpg
- File:FranklinMintMetroEngine.jpg
- File:AuburnRancheroWindow.jpg
- File:AuburnCunningham.jpg
- File:AuburnRubberIndyRacer.jpg
- File:PMCFordRanchero.jpg
- File:MarxHudsonFire.jpg
- File:PMCPlymouthTaxi.jpg
- File:PMCPlymouthChassis.jpg
File:HubleyFordWagon.jpg- File:Johan66Toronado.jpg
- File:AMT62Ford.jpg
- File:JohanPlymouth.jpg
File:Hubley58Ford.jpgFile:Hubley58Ford2.jpg
- Maybe this is not the place, but any suggestions on how to illustrate models in Wikipedia articles if they are copyrighted and cannot be used without permission? The articles seem pretty hollow without the ability to show the vehicles or their packaging - the pictures, even used sparingly, say a lot about the product discussed. They seem to get deleted just as quick in local Wikipedias also. Maybe if I 'draw' a precise picture of the scale model? I'm being facetious. I think it's about time to say that there are types of subjects that really are not appropriate for Wikipedia and are best treated elsewhere (books and other published outlets) where permissions are obtained or fair use is considered more broadly. Such a subject is perhaps all too specialized for Wikipedia anyway.--150.134.234.144 15:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Ooops. The above comment was me. --Cstevencampbell (talk) 15:11, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Cstevencampbell: Local wikipedias have differing rules... English Wikipedia allows Non-free Content under a "Fair Use" argument in a number of different circumstances. The image's description page must include a non-free usage rationale detailing why each specific usage of the image is legally allowable under US law. A relevant example might be File:Vogue_USA_January_2010.jpg. The criteria are relatively stringent, and can be found at W:WP:NFCC, but I do think they might apply to some of the photos that were deleted, hence my offer to temporarily undelete and assist in my closing above. Please use my talk page to request or discuss that.
- Regarding the images in this new DR, they can be kept if it can be shown that either:
- The toy was released before 1978 and its copyright was not declared by a copyright notice (this might be difficult to do unless all the packaging and documentation of the toy can be examined) - this would make the toy {{PD-US-no notice}}
- The toy was released before 1964 and its copyright was not renewed. Copyrights initially registered before 1964 had to be renewed every 28 years (with some grace period). Renewals are found at https://archive.org/details/copyrightrecords but I've never searched for toys before, so am unsure where exactly they would be located. Failure to renew would make the toy {{PD-US-not renewed}}. Storkk (talk) 18:26, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Any that are of vehicles after 1950 are relatively easy to check for renewals at http://www.copyright.gov/records/ because all records from 1/1/1978 are searchable by title or copyright owner. Any renewal of a model later than 1/1/1950 must show up in the searchable database. I've done four of them for starters. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:23, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Jameslwoodward: Thanks! For my own edification (I find searching for copyright renewals difficult), would you mind sharing some search strings you used? I have always be loathe to "certify" I have not found a renewal, since I am often unsure of exactly what I should be searching for, so I'm stymied before I start by the prospect of false-negatives. Storkk (talk) 17:56, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- Any that are of vehicles after 1950 are relatively easy to check for renewals at http://www.copyright.gov/records/ because all records from 1/1/1978 are searchable by title or copyright owner. Any renewal of a model later than 1/1/1950 must show up in the searchable database. I've done four of them for starters. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:23, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- First, let's be clear that we are talking about an automated search in the Office's on line searchable database that starts at 1/1/1978. Searching earlier records is harder, particularly because they are in six month chunks and there is a grace period, so you need to search at least three times.
- It's like any other search, except it isn't Google -- it turns up only the exact words you ask for. "Ford" as a title returned 3047 hits (25 to a page), so that was no good. "Hubley", as a name, returned only 94, so that was good. I looked at "Revell " (note the space, which eliminates names like "Revell, John") and it turns up only post 1979 models, but I didn't do anything with it because the Revell models above aren't dated and might be before 1950.
- I agree that models are harder than works that naturally have a title, like books and most paintings. You can search on one or more words, and, using the "other search options" button, search in more than one way at a time. Mostly it's just finding a search term that doesn't turn up thousands of results.
- By the way, are we assuming that all of these models have a copyright notice on the bottom -- I think that assumption is appropriate. Every model I've ever seen has one. If so, then the Franklin Mint examples above are not PD -- the Mint was founded in 1964, so no renewal was needed to keep them under copyright for 95 years from first publication with notice. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:51, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for your advice, Jim. Is it a safe assumption that the copyright would be registered in the name of the company? (that's a genuine question, and not implying that I don't think it's safe) It's probably somewhat obviated when the company's name is the same as the founder (and presumed designer?), but I guess the assumption is that they did not as a general rule license designs from a third party. Storkk (talk) 13:17, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
- Copyright registrations for corporate works (at least for corporations in the toy business) are virtually always in the name of the company and there is virtually always a work for hire agreement in place (I speak as an expert -- I have both written and signed many of them over the years, although not in the toy business). Even if they licensed a third party design, they would do the registration in order to ensure that it was done correctly. The toy industry is super paranoid about its Intellectual Property. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me)
- Thanks, that is good to know. Storkk (talk) 14:08, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
- Copyright registrations for corporate works (at least for corporations in the toy business) are virtually always in the name of the company and there is virtually always a work for hire agreement in place (I speak as an expert -- I have both written and signed many of them over the years, although not in the toy business). Even if they licensed a third party design, they would do the registration in order to ensure that it was done correctly. The toy industry is super paranoid about its Intellectual Property. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me)
- Thanks for your advice, Jim. Is it a safe assumption that the copyright would be registered in the name of the company? (that's a genuine question, and not implying that I don't think it's safe) It's probably somewhat obviated when the company's name is the same as the founder (and presumed designer?), but I guess the assumption is that they did not as a general rule license designs from a third party. Storkk (talk) 13:17, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
- By the way, are we assuming that all of these models have a copyright notice on the bottom -- I think that assumption is appropriate. Every model I've ever seen has one. If so, then the Franklin Mint examples above are not PD -- the Mint was founded in 1964, so no renewal was needed to keep them under copyright for 95 years from first publication with notice. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:51, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:52, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Cstevencampbell (talk · contribs)
[edit]- File:ToyGamdaBarracuda.jpg
- File:FunHo Caterpillar.jpg
- File:EfsoCommerKLMvan.jpg
- File:ToysBritainsHowitzer.jpg
- File:ToysMercuryChaparral2f.jpg
- File:ToyCigarboxLolaChrome.jpg
- File:ToysBarclaySportsCars.jpg
- File:ToyPontiacSafariWagon.jpg
- File:ToyCheetahChevy.jpg
- File:ProgettoKFerrari225base.jpg
Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:59, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 07:15, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- File:Berseba church, plaque 02.jpg -- The church was built in 1857. The designer is dead. Take my word for it.
- File:Baumgartsbrunn entrance.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. A farm gate is not art.
- File:Berseba church, plaque 01.jpg -- The church was built in 1857. The designer is dead, I promise.
- File:Bethanie, main road.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. A tarmac road is not art.
- File:Bethanie Mission Church plaque.jpg -- I don't think this crosses the threshold of originality in any way. But yeah, take it down if you must.
- File:Bethanie Mission Church April 2016.jpg -- The church was built in 1859. The designer was dead like a dodo in 1966, even though I don't know who it was.
- File:Von-Bach-Damm-Feb-2015.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. A dam wall is not art.
- File:Schmelen House April 2016.jpg -- Built in 1812. Schmelen probably designed it himself. He died in the 19th century.
- File:Lentia Lutheran Church, Bethanie.jpg -- Built 1899 says the picture. No idea who designed it, but if the architect was in their early 30s they would have to have reached 100 years of age to not be dead by 1966.
- File:Halifax Island.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. A shack is not art.
- File:Thom Cemetery.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. A tomb stone is not art.
- File:Putuavanga SSS.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. Classrooms are not art.
- File:White flag in yard.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. This is a standard residential building, which is not art.
- File:Otjinene village centre.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. Trees and sand and cars and zinc shacks are not art.
- File:Gobabis Wikipedia training Feb 2013 -- Group photo.JPG -- no artistic work in this picture. I am not art.
- File:Rietquelle JSS.JPG -- no artistic work in this picture. Classrooms are not art.
- File:Mokganedi Tlhabanello High.JPG -- no artistic work in this picture. Classrooms are not art.
- File:Mokganedi Tlhabanello High plaque.JPG -- This is the school's inauguration plaque. The window sill above is not art.
- File:Epukiro Post 3 JSS.JPG -- no artistic work in this picture. Classrooms are not art.
- File:Epukiro.JPG -- This is the school again. No art.
- File:Gobabis water tower.JPG -- no artistic work in this picture. A water tower is not art.
- File:Windhoek Observer offices.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. An office building is not art.
- File:Turnhalle Windhoek.jpg -- built by Otto Busch. Probably long dead in 1966 as he was a master architect when he built it in 1909, but no, I don't have proof.
- File:Donkey cart in Kalkrand.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. A donkey cart is not art, and neither are the residential buildings in the background.
- File:Grünau Railway Station.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. A railway station certainly can be art, but this one? Anyway, the railway was completed in 1909. Railway builders didn't live very long those days. I posit that the architect was dead in 1966, but no, no proof.
- File:Asab General Dealer.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. This is a standard shop building, which is not art.
- File:Khauxanas-bw1.jpg -- Built 1798. The designer is Klaas Afrikaner. We don't know his date of death, but as he was born in 1760 he was very likely dead in 1966.
- File:Memorial Seeis war cemetery.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. An iron cross with a number on, is not art. Neither is the stone plinth.
- File:Info Seeis war cemetery.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. Stones slabs are not art.
- File:Graves2 Seeis war cemetery.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. Tomb stones are not art.
- File:Graves1 Seeis war cemetery.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. Tomb stones are not art.
- File:Entrance Seeis war cemetery.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. Iron gates are not art, at least not this one.
- File:Neudamm.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. Residential buildings are not art.
- File:Seeis school.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. Classrooms are not art.
- File:Info Barracks Swakopmund.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. A metal plaque not art.
- File:Barracks Swakopmund.jpg built during the German war 1904/07. Architect probably long dead in 1966 as they were at their prime when designing it, but I don't have proof, indeed.
- File:Sanderburg.jpg -- built by Wilhelm Sander, died 1930.
- File:NSX.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture.
- File:Ramblers.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. Floodlights are not art. Goalposts are not art. To make a lawn this green in a country this dry is an art, but not copyrightable.
- File:PO-Boxes.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. PO Boxes are not art.
- File:Polytechnic of Namibia laboratories.jpg -- The designer is alive. If you think this is a work of art, go ahead.
- File:Polytechnic of Namibia engineering campus.jpg -- The designer is alive. If you think this is a work of art, go ahead.
- File:Polytechnic of Namibia library.jpg -- The designer is alive. If you think this is a work of art, go ahead.
- File:Polytechnic of Namibia Science and Technology building.jpg -- The designer is alive. If you think this is a work of art, go ahead.
- File:Polytechnic of Namibia Main Entrance.jpg -- no artistic work in this picture. Metal gates are not art.
- File:Elisabeth House.jpg -- built by Wilhelm Sander, died 1930.
- File:Deadvlei2.jpg -- no longer under consideration, see below.
Elisfkc (talk) 19:32, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Withdrawing nomination for File:Deadvlei2.jpg, since it is not a building & does not include a building anywhere. Elisfkc (talk) 19:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Withdrawing nomination for File:Berseba church, plaque 02.jpg, since I already nominated it. Elisfkc (talk) 19:38, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose: With maybe the exception of File:Berseba church, plaque 01.jpg I cannot identify any works of art in these pictures. One could argue that buildings like File:Sanderburg.jpg and the several churches are themselves works of art, but here, due to the age of the buildings, all possible rights have expired. --Pgallert (talk) 07:38, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Pgallert: When were they built, who was the architect, and when did they die? Unless you can answer all of those and prove that it is past Nambiba's copyright length, then it can stay. Otherwise, per COM:PCP & Freedom of Panorama (which is the copyright of a building), it should be deleted. Elisfkc (talk) 20:48, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Elisfkc: Thanks for your response. There is no "an artistic work, other than a photograph" in most of these pictures. School buildings are not artistic work. PO Boxes are not artistic work. Farm gates are not artistic work. Not even in Namibia. I have annotated the pictures above. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 08:30, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- Pgallert, your comment above is incorrect. Most of your individual comments are also incorrect. I have looked through some of them, and I see only one work that did not have a copyright, although it may have expired in many cases. The Namibian law is very clear. Among works covered are:
- "artistic work" means, irrespective of its artistic quality-
- (a)...
- (b) a work of architecture, being either a building or a model of a building; or
- Therefore, as in the USA, all buildings, however small, have or had a copyright. As you say, some of them are long out of copyright. Also, all text has or had a copyright, so at least one of the plaques above is under copyright unless the author died more than fifty years ago. That period is extended if the first publication was posthumous. The several complex gate structures also have copyrights, either as buildings (in at least one case) or as sculpture, in other cases. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:59, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- The Namibian law is very clear indeed but you didn't read far enough, Jameslwoodward. Further down in the law you quote we find:
IANAL but if you ask me the "normal exploitation" of a church is to go and pray there, of a farm gate, to keep animals in or out, of a school building to conduct classes, and so on. This applies to all of the pictures, not just one or two. So when I said above XXX is not art, read it in a way like The purpose of this is not to be exhibited, admired, and have its meaning discussed by spectators, but a lot more mundane. The "legitimate interests of the owner of the copyright", in the case of standard buildings like offices, bars, walls, dams, and the like, is to get paid for their work and move on. Nobody would claim that you cannot design a 3-bedroom house of certain dimensions if someone else designed one before you. The ordinary way of exploiting a residential building is to live in it, not to take pictures of it."In addition to reproductions permitted in terms of this Act reproduction of a work shall also be permitted in such circumstances as are prescribed, but in such a manner that the reproduction is not in conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and is not unreasonably prejudicial to the legitimate interests of the owner of the copyright."
- Essentially your reading of our law would mean that as long as there is a structure on a picture that is built by humans, no matter how incidental, small or trivial, no picture of it could be published in any way. How do you think Namibians produce TV and newspapers? By taking everyone out into the desert? --Pgallert (talk) 19:27, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- I fear I need to add a tldr; version: The normal exploitation of a photograph is to view it. The normal exploitation of a building is to use it. These two ways of exploitation are different, do not conflict, and are therefore explicitly permitted in Namibian law. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 19:44, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- The Namibian law is very clear indeed but you didn't read far enough, Jameslwoodward. Further down in the law you quote we find:
- Pgallert, your comment above is incorrect. Most of your individual comments are also incorrect. I have looked through some of them, and I see only one work that did not have a copyright, although it may have expired in many cases. The Namibian law is very clear. Among works covered are:
- @Elisfkc: Thanks for your response. There is no "an artistic work, other than a photograph" in most of these pictures. School buildings are not artistic work. PO Boxes are not artistic work. Farm gates are not artistic work. Not even in Namibia. I have annotated the pictures above. Cheers, Pgallert (talk) 08:30, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Pgallert: When were they built, who was the architect, and when did they die? Unless you can answer all of those and prove that it is past Nambiba's copyright length, then it can stay. Otherwise, per COM:PCP & Freedom of Panorama (which is the copyright of a building), it should be deleted. Elisfkc (talk) 20:48, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose: With maybe the exception of File:Berseba church, plaque 01.jpg I cannot identify any works of art in these pictures. One could argue that buildings like File:Sanderburg.jpg and the several churches are themselves works of art, but here, due to the age of the buildings, all possible rights have expired. --Pgallert (talk) 07:38, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- Withdrawing nomination for File:Berseba church, plaque 02.jpg, since I already nominated it. Elisfkc (talk) 19:38, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
No, sorry, although we don't have many cases from Namibia, similar language appears in copyright law everywhere. You are focusing on the interests of the owner of the work, but copyright law protects the interests of the creator. In each case, the creator retains the right to exploit the work -- so that an architectural design copyright covers not only putting up the structure, but also the ability to sell photographs of the structure once it is built. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:25, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
- But we're not talking about everywhere, we're talking about the law in Namibia. You have selectively quoted one fragment of Namibian legislation that seems to suggest taking photos is not allowed. I have selectively quoted another fragment that shows it is allowed. Nowhere in Namibian law will you find that taking pictures of ordinary buildings conflicts with the normal exploitation of the creator's work. It is you who is wrong, not me, so please drop the stick. --Pgallert (talk) 10:35, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
No FOP in Ghana
- File:Holy Spirit Cathedral, Accra-information.jpg
- File:Holy Spirit Cathedral, Accra.jpg
- File:Traditional healer stand in Accra.jpg
Elisfkc (talk) 19:34, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose: No artworks in the first two pictures. The third picture does not show any artworks permanently placed on public display, as the reproduced paintings most definitely are long sold, so I don't see the FOP issue there. --Pgallert (talk) 18:41, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Pgallert: When was it built, who was the architect, and when did they die? Unless you can answer all of those and prove that it is past Ghana's copyright length, then it can stay. Otherwise, per COM:PCP & Freedom of Panorama (which is the copyright of a building), it should be deleted. Elisfkc (talk) 20:49, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Elisfkc: Could it be that you did not read my comment? --Pgallert (talk) 08:38, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Pgallert: Buildings are considered art, as they are the work of architects. Elisfkc (talk) 19:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Elisfkc: I'm not contesting File:Holy Spirit Cathedral, Accra.jpg. The "building" in File:Traditional healer stand in Accra.jpg is most definitely not the work of an architect, and File:Holy Spirit Cathedral, Accra-information.jpg does not depict any building. --Pgallert (talk) 20:52, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Pgallert: Buildings are considered art, as they are the work of architects. Elisfkc (talk) 19:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Elisfkc: Could it be that you did not read my comment? --Pgallert (talk) 08:38, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- @Pgallert: When was it built, who was the architect, and when did they die? Unless you can answer all of those and prove that it is past Ghana's copyright length, then it can stay. Otherwise, per COM:PCP & Freedom of Panorama (which is the copyright of a building), it should be deleted. Elisfkc (talk) 20:49, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted these per nomination. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:03, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- I'll not fight the fight for Ghana. I don't know their laws. But I find it surprising that you would delete "per nom" when the nom has been refuted for two of the three pictures. --Pgallert (talk) 19:58, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
- No, your comment above is dead wrong on all three items. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:50, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
- But you would not bother to point out what is wrong with them. I get it. --Pgallert (talk) 10:37, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
- No, your comment above is dead wrong on all three items. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:50, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
- I do get tired of trying to educate with someone who argues about law that is completely and solidly established. You may not like it, you may not understand it, but it is the law.
- The first one above has a copyright for the symbol in the upper left. The second is clearly modern architecture and your photograph infringes on the architect's copyright. The third, you have the concept of FOP backwards -- the only things that are free to photograph in some countries (but not Ghana and Namibia) are things that are permanently on public display, see COM:FOP. In 61 countries, including Ghana and Namibia, there is no FOP, so you cannot upload images of work with copyrights to Commons. That includes any architectural work, no matter how small or inartistic. So, in the third, your photograph infringes on the copyright to each of the paintings shown in the photo. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:05, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted about half of these. I think there is a real question of whether all of the ones I kept are in scope, but that should be a separate DR. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:57, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
- I Restored a big part of these, as per [4]. Yann (talk) 01:36, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
No evindence of permission. Uploaded when OTRS already existed, needs OTRS permission. Jcb (talk) 11:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination -- credited author is not uploader. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:28, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
Possible Copyvio. There is no evidence that permission was granted to the uploader. Delete per COM:PRP. Olaniyan Olushola (talk) 16:18, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:29, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
I do not think this fits easily under our blanket rule that graffiti, being illegal, does not have a copyright. This is by a named artist and is serving as a memorial. The image was drawn as a DW of a photograph, see http://knownpeople.net/b/bud-spencer/ about halfway down, so there are three copyrights here: (1) the photograph of the wall, which is licensed, (2) the graffiti, which is covered by Hungarian FOP, and (3) the photograph from which the graffiti was made. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:44, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- To be honest, all I did was taking a picture of it. Even the family of Bud Spencer shared this art (not my picture but there are several thousands of it because the place became kind of a shrine just after the appearance of the graffiti) so I thought it might have been legal to upload the file - as they did not express an objection against it -, and referring to the FoP in Hungary. If you think this is a copyvio feel free to delete it. Best wishes, Oppashi
talk 10:55, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
![42 File:"Rocky" Roque De La Fuente.jpg](#File:"Rocky"_Roque_De_La_Fuente.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
![159 File:Iglesia "Inmaculada Concepcion".jpg](#File:Iglesia_"Inmaculada_Concepcion".jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![180 File:"Birth of the New World" "Nacimiento de un Nuevo Mundo" in Arecibo, PR.jpg](#File:"Birth_of_the_New_World"_"Nacimiento_de_un_Nuevo_Mundo"_in_Arecibo,_PR.jpg){kind=link}
_5.41.42_p.m.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_gets_underway_on_17_October_2016.JPG){kind=link}
propellanes.png){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}
![22:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2016/10/20#c-Jim1138-2016-10-20T22:13:00.000Z-File:"Rocky"_Roque_De_La_Fuente.jpg){kind=link}
![00:02, 21 October 2016 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2016/10/20#c-INeverCry-2016-10-21T00:02:00.000Z-File:"Rocky"_Roque_De_La_Fuente.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){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§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.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}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
![18:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2016/10/20#c-Taivo-2016-10-20T18:35:00.000Z-File:Iglesia_"Inmaculada_Concepcion".jpg){kind=link}
![22:37, 26 October 2016 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2016/10/20#c-INeverCry-2016-10-26T22:37:00.000Z-File:Iglesia_"Inmaculada_Concepcion".jpg){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){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![23:54, 20 October 2016 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2016/10/20#c-Kaldari-2016-10-20T23:54:00.000Z-File:"Birth_of_the_New_World"_"Nacimiento_de_un_Nuevo_Mundo"_in_Arecibo,_PR.jpg){kind=link}
![22:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2016/10/20#c-INeverCry-2016-10-26T22:41:00.000Z-File:"Birth_of_the_New_World"_"Nacimiento_de_un_Nuevo_Mundo"_in_Arecibo,_PR.jpg){kind=link}
_5.41.42_p.m.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_5.41.42_p.m.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_5.41.42_p.m.png){kind=link}
_5.41.42_p.m.png){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_gets_underway_on_17_October_2016.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_gets_underway_on_17_October_2016.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_gets_underway_on_17_October_2016.JPG){kind=link}
_gets_underway_on_17_October_2016.JPG){kind=link}
- Given the fact that it is graffiti and that there is FOP in Hungary for all artistic works, we can safely ignore the graffiti artist's copyright, but the work clearly infringes on the cited photograph and we can't ignore that. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:29, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
@Jameslwoodward: the rights of the original photograph is probably with the family of Bud Spencer. His son just visited the shrine a couple of days ago. Would it solve the problem if the family gave permission? Teemeah (talk) 16:10, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
It is a photograph of an artwork on public display, and since Hungary has FoP, I really don't understand this request, it should be kept. --XXLVenom999 (talk) 16:40, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
XXLVenom999, As I noted above, there are three copyrights here. The photograph, (1) above, is licensed by the photographer. (2) above, the graffiti, is covered by Hungarian FOP. The problem is (3), the photograph from which the graffiti was drawn. Unless the graffiti artist had a free license from the photographer, that copyright is not covered by FOP. As an example, suppose someone, without permission from Disney, draws a beautiful image of Mickey Mouse on a wall in Hungary. Can we keep a photo of it on Commons? No, not without a license from Disney.
Teemeah, as a general rule, the rights to a photograph remain with the photographer, not the subject. If the family actually can produce a written license from the photographer which allows them, as the heirs, to freely license the photograph, then by all means encourage them to send a copy of that license together with a free license to OTRS. However, if they can not prove, with a written instrument, that they have the right to freely license the photograph, then they can't help us here. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:08, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:08, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Com:DW. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 11:13, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Although these might not be over the ToO and have a copyright in the USA, they would have a copyright in many places. Since we don not know the ToO in North Korea, COM:PRP requires us to assume that they are violations.
- File:Logo of the Korean Central News Agency.svg
- File:Logo of the Korean Central Television.svg
- File:Anti-Imperialist National Democratic Front Logo.svg
. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:50, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Okay please chill now. It's clear you want me to stop contributing. There are TONS of files on Commons which are ToO as well and the Commons server is located in the US right? Why don't you hit on files like this then? File:Korean Central Television logo.svg It's the same thing like my work.
- Or these...
*[[:File:USDA logo.png]] (below USA ToO and PD-USGOV)
*[[:File:SPD logo.svg]] {{t|PD-textlogo}}
*[[:File:Chicago Aurora and Elgin Railroad logo.png]] {below the USA ToO)
*[[:File:Bkv.png]] {{t|PD-textlogo}}
*[[:File:Flag of Jihad.svg]] {{t|PD-textlogo}}
*[[:File:ISAF-Logo.svg]] {{t|PD-textlogo}}
*[[:File:STANDUPedlogo.png]] {{t|PD-textlogo}}
*[[:File:NDR Dachmarke.png]] {{t|PD-textlogo}}
*[[:File:Jpmorgan.png]] {below the USA ToO)
- And the list goes on. This whole stuff is just ridiculous. I want to contribute and I upload self-created legal files, not copyrighted ones. If you don't like my works feel free to tell me or ask me to stop uploading ANYTHING. I have no time to 'discuss' because the result will be deletion every time, I guess. Oppashi talk 11:51, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- "It's clear you want me to stop contributing." Nothing could be further from the truth. Yes, I and our colleagues want you to stop contributing files that are copyright violations, but a skilled SVG creator is a valuable asset for Commons. You yourself requested a review of your contributions and out of 24 items, I tagged three SVGs, a photograph that was not your creation, and a photo of a graffiti work that has a clear copyright problem. 19 of the 24 are fine, thank you for bringing them to Commons. If you have any doubts in the future about something you would like to make an SVG of and upload, drop a note on my talk page, or at the Village Pump.
- There are thirty-four million files on Commons. We get ten thousand new files every day. The numbers make a systematic approval process impossible, so files are posted for deletion if and when they reach the attention of an editor who thinks they may be a problem. It is, therefore, never valid to cite existing problems as reasons why your own files should be kept. See WP:other stuff exists.
- Some of the files above are PD because they come from the USA, where the ToO is relatively high. Since we don't know the ToO in North Korea, or even if there is any case law on the subject, we must assume that the ToO is relatively low, as it is in the UK. Some are PD because they consist only of text. The USDA logo is PD because all US Federal works are PD and because it is well below the US ToO. I have posted Commons:Deletion requests/File:Korean Central Television logo.svg for the only one above that seems to be a problem. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:00, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- After reading DPRK Copyright Law in Korean as well I have read some tricky thing. In the English version on the Article 38 they state:
"The term of protection of related right shall be up to 50years from the moment of performance, sound- or video-recording or broadcasting. The term of protection shall be calculated from the 1st of January of the year following the year of performance, sound- or video-recording or broadcasting."
But in the original Korean version for "video-recording" they use the term "록화" which literally means to record image(s). As they basically don't emphasize what about photos I guess by video they meant movies and photos as well. If this is true then photos lose copyright 50 years after their creation because they are counted from the moment of. I guess it's time to contact a North Korean embassy... Oppashi talk 15:21, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Hmm. That's an interesting question. I don't read Korean, so I have used Google, which, of course, is sometimes wrong and rarely captures subtleties. The official WIPO translation uses the word "video-recording" in article 38. I also note that at article 9, which lists the various kinds of works that are subject to copyright, line 4, which covers cinema and television does not use the term "록화", and line 6, which covers photographic works uses '사진" for "photo".
- Note also that Article 38 covers only "related rights" -- it is not the term of the fundamental copyright. That is covered at Article 23-25, which calls for 50 years from the death of the author or 50 years from publication in the case of an organizational work.
- Therefore, I think it is a long stretch to take the term out of "from the moment of performance, sound- or video-recording or broadcasting" in Article 38 and assume that it means to include still photographs as well as videos. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:58, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- I know 사진 means photo, it truly does but... Isn't it weird that they don't mention photos in the Article 38? Oppashi talk 16:06, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- It's not just photos that aren't mentioned in Article 38 -- it's all artistic works -- photos, paintings, sculpture etc. That's because 38 applies only to "related rights" which applies only to performance works and other works. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:57, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Comment Hope Oppashi work can be kept, I miss more visual info (logos, flags...) on movements articles.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 23:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- @HCPUNXKID: These are exactly what I want to create. Oppashi talk 08:18, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
| Logo | founded | © expires (50+1) 01. Jan. | Decision |
|---|---|---|---|
| Korean Central News Agency | 1946 | 1997 | PD by age |
| Korean Central Television | 1953 | 2004 | PD by age |
| Anti-Imperialist National Democratic Front | 1969 | 2020 | Doesn't seem to be the correct logo. See http://www.aindf.com/ |
Assuming the data provided by enwiki is correct. Assuming the logos haven't been altered over the years and have been used in the year stated and not later. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 11:33, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Kept: 2 kept, one deleted. Sep. discussion with uploader on his talk page about logo #3. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 11:41, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Il est inexact (plusieurs zones en violet appartiennent en fait à la maison des Orléans) et ne présente pas les importantes possessions de la famille la plus riche de France, les Valois-Orléans DrVanleene (talk) 19:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Seems to be the uploader (Same last name). --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 11:56, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
No source. Missing authorship information, so that copyright situation cannot be determined Jcb (talk) 21:42, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Postcard, I added 2 sources. --Achim (talk) 12:41, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
- Unfortunately we still don't have the necessary authorship information, which is probably at the backside. Jcb (talk) 12:48, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: Doesn't matter. 1905 is plenty old enuf to be PD. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 11:58, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Renominating after contacting closing admin. For European works, 1905 is not "plenty old enuf to be PD" of course. Authors name may be at the backsite, as often seen in Europe. Jcb (talk) 16:27, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
- Keep 100+ years is plenty old enough -> PD by age in US. Europe is a different problem: Probably made by a German photographer, the © would expire 70 years pma. BUT, the author isn't mentioned and in my experience, the photographer's name often isn't mentioned on the back of the card. Therefore PD-EU-anon is a safe choice. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 22:04, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
- Without actually seeing the back side of the card, we cannot know whether there is an author mentioned or not. So unless we have the back side available, this should be deleted per COM:PCP. Jcb (talk) 16:26, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Kept: as per previously closure. --Yann (talk) 18:32, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
There is no evidence that it meets the requirement of the tag {{PD-North Korea}}, which are that it must be one of:
- It is a work of an institution, enterprise or organization, and 50 years have passed since the date of its publication
- It is another kind of work, and 50 years have passed since the year of death of the author (or last-surviving author)
- It is a "work whose publication, issuance, performance, broadcasting, show and exhibition is prohibited" in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea
- It is ineligible for copyright protection because it is a "document for state management" without a commercial purpose
- Is possible, but there is no proof that it is the work of an organization, or that it has been published.
- Is also possible, but the date of death must be proven -- 1946 is fifty years too recent to assume it that the photographer died before 1966.
- Perhaps, but again, not proven.
- Probably not.
. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- There is, as I indicated in the description it was taken on 28 August 1946, on the foundation of the Workers' Party of North Korea. It's 50 years in North Korea, and 70 years in most of the countries. They both passed. Actually it's from the same picture: File:28.08.1946 Labour Party North Korea.jpg Oppashi talk 10:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you. That image has a different PD tag, so I have opened a separate DR, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:28.08.1946 Labour Party North Korea.jpg. You need to be careful, country to country, that the date at which the fifty or seventy years begins varies. If it were date of creation in North Korea, these would be fine, but it is fifty years from publication, but only in the case of a work by an organization. For "from date of publication" countries, you need to prove the date of publication, and, in the case of North Korea, that it was the "work of an institution, enterprise or organization". . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:12, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
keep. "It is a work of an institution, enterprise or organization, and 50 years have passed since the date of its publication". Do you really think that these pictures, taken at a foundation of the party can be anything else than a work of a government organization, in a country where virtually there are no private enterprises_ The publication date is set, it is 1946. Thatás more than 50 years, and it even passes the 70 years of other countries. Teemeah (talk) 11:13, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Photographs aren't made by organizations, they are made by photographers. I doubt that that provision can apply to any photograph. As for publication, that is an assumption, which we don't permit. A typical photographer will take several, if not many, photographs of an event. Only one will be published. Commons requires proof that this particular image was actually published and that it is not an image that has emerged recently from among many in a photographer's archive or a newspaper's morgue. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- I am pretty sure it was published that or next day because this event played a key role in the consolidation of power by Kim Il Sung. Rodong Sinmun and Geunroja (Kŭnroja) were daily newspapers of the Workers' Party of North Korea back then so they could publish it without any problem. Oppashi talk 11:33, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- I am pretty sure it was published that or next day because this event played a key role in the consolidation of power by Kim Il Sung. Rodong Sinmun and Geunroja (Kŭnroja) were daily newspapers of the Workers' Party of North Korea back then so they could publish it without any problem. Oppashi
- Our standard of proof is "beyond a significant doubt", not "pretty sure", and, again, you certainly don't know that it was this particular image that was actually published and not another taken earlier or later during the same event. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:19, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- It does not matter who took the picture it was the property of the Workers' Party of North Korea. And they published it certainly because it was a great event back then. It's like publishing right away who won the elections. Now 50 years, even 70 passed. Oppashi talk 13:31, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- It does not matter who took the picture it was the property of the Workers' Party of North Korea. And they published it certainly because it was a great event back then. It's like publishing right away who won the elections. Now 50 years, even 70 passed. Oppashi
- Third time. Repeating that this image was certainly published is not useful. I'm happy to stipulate that an image of this event was published, but you must prove that in fact it was this particular image, not another similar image by the same or a different photographer that was published. That usually requires a scan of the newspaper or other publication medium.
- The image from which this was cropped, File:28.08.1946 Labour Party North Korea.jpg, at high magnification shows no signs of halftone, so it is very unlikely that the scan is from a printed work -- it is almost certainly a scan of a paper photograph. Furthermore, it has the rounded corners characteristic of an amateur photograph, not a professional image, so my guess is that it was scanned from a small print made by an amateur who happened to be there. Such a photo would neither belong to the Party nor have been published. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 13:50, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
There is no evidence that it meets the requirement of the tag {{PD-DPRKOld}}:
- Article 23: The property rights to a copyrighted work shall be protected from the moment of its publication to the 50th year after the death of its author. The property rights to a joint copyrighted work shall be protected from the moment of its publication to the 50th year after the death of the last survivor of the co-authors.
- Article 24: The property rights to a copyrighted work or a copyrighted visual art work whose author is an institution, enterprise or organization shall be protected for up to 50 years from the moment of its publication.
- (23) 1946 is far too recent to assume that the photographer has been dead for fifty years.
- (24) There is no evidence that it is the work of an organization and no evidence that it has been published.
. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
As I noted at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pak Jong Ae, 28 August 1946.png which is a crop from this, at high magnification this image shows no sign of halftone, so it is very unlikely that it was a scan from a publication. Also, as you can see at the full size image, this image has the rounded corners and general quality characteristic of a small amateur photograph of the time, not the square corners and high quality I would expect of a professional making photographs for publication. I therefore think that this was probably made privately by one of the members of the audience and never published. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:14, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 13:50, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by JuTa as no source (No source since)
Mural in a 17th century temple. No source needed. Ref Gurdwara Baba Atal. Fæ (talk) 11:05, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 13:55, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
No source. Where does the underlying base map come from? Different users are uploading this map as own work, see e.g. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Salamanca, Spain location.png Jcb (talk) 11:28, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 13:55, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
No source. Jcb (talk) 11:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: Own work. --Yann (talk) 14:00, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
No source. Who is the photographer? When did he/she die? Jcb (talk) 11:36, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- InfoI found two sources for this image: http://www.neuschwanstein.de/deutsch/ludwig/daten.htm and http://www.herren-chiemsee.de/deutsch/ludwig/daten.htm both from german Bayerische Schlösserverwaltung. Image description there is:
- "Aufbahrung des Leichnams König Ludwigs II. in der Hofkapelle der Residenz München. Originalfotografie, wohl von Valentin Beganowski oder Franz Hanfstaengl, München, 16.-18.6.1886 König Ludwig trägt die schwarze spanische Tracht des königlichen Ritterordens vom heiligen Hubertus, auf der Brust liegt ein Jasminstrauß von Kaiserin Elisabeth."
- Google has no information for Valentin Beganowski. 2nd, Franz Hanfstaengl died in 1877. --GeorgHH • talk 19:16, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: Old enough anyway. --Yann (talk) 14:03, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
No source. Without any authorship information we do not know whether the photographer died 'a 100 years ago' as randomly stated by uploader. Jcb (talk) 11:45, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Salomé Ureña est née le 21 octobre 1850, et morte le 6 mars 1897. Elle s'est mis en retrait de toute activité en 1885, avec l'avènement de la dictature d'Ulises Heureaux. Je ne sais pas qui est l'auteur mais la photo a plus de 130 ans. --HenriDavel (talk) 15:48, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: Old enough anyway. --Yann (talk) 14:05, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
No source. Who is the author? When did he/she die? Jcb (talk) 11:50, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 14:10, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
propellanes.png){kind=link}
propellanes.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
copyvio, belongs to Robert W. Weber & James M. Cook 2003:D2:1BCC:BC2D:9730:6D29:CA64:16EE 14:36, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
propellanes.png){kind=link}
- There isn't copyvio about chemical formula - it's true, I take the good style of those in the article of Robert W. Weber & James M. Cook that I give as source on information of this picture but nowhere in the article this formula appears in totality as well as the complet formula of the intermediate tetramethylpropellanedione tetracarboxylate doesn't appear. So what copy this file ? --Titou (talk) 15:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: {{PD-chem}}, but is better to convert to SVG. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:38, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Amitie 10g: okay to convert to .svg but I'm unable to make that. Could you please make it ? --Titou (talk) 06:41, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
- I'll try to do the best as I can. --Amitie 10g (talk) 12:48, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you! look at your talk user page because there is still a little problem --Titou (talk) 05:21, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
- I'll try to do the best as I can. --Amitie 10g (talk) 12:48, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
- @Amitie 10g: okay to convert to .svg but I'm unable to make that. Could you please make it ? --Titou (talk) 06:41, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
- Kept: PD-chem. --Yann (talk) 14:19, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Docentballhorn (talk · contribs)
[edit]Although the case law is not completely clear as to which of the several parties to an interview owns the copyright, both statute and case law is clear that there is a copyright. The usual advice is to get a license from the interviewer, the interviewee, and the person or organization which did the actual recording. Therefore, in order to keep these on Commons, we need three licenses.
Also, it is not at all clear from the file description whether either Erik Larsson (the subject) or Mona Duvander (the interviewer) is notable and therefore why the uploader believes these meet our requirement that they be useful for an educational purpose. If these are to be kept, that must also be proven.
- File:Intervju med Erik Larsson, del 1 (31 minuter).wav
- File:Intervju med Erik Larsson, del 2. (30 minuter).wav
. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:09, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
I will try to explain myself in english (not my native tounge, but i hope it will be comprehensible). First of all a question about license: I cannot get a license from the organization, because it is no longer existing. The municipality of Bara seized to exist 1977 and became a part of the greater municipality of Svedala. The Interviewee is no longer alive, but the interviewer (Duvander) has given her approval but only with an oral agreement. I can see if i can get a written permission from her. Would that be enough?
Now about the notability: Are Erik Larsson or Mona Duvander notable? None of them are, but the subject matter of the interview is. It is about the school in Skabersjö https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skabersj%C3%B6skolan, (Erik Larsson was teacher and then headmaster for the school for 44 years). It is a "listed building" in Sweden (Swedish: byggnadsminne), wich therefore enjoys the strongest legal cultural and historical protection available. The article on swedish wikipedia has been approved as an article about a notable subject matter. I think that this interview could be a valuable and fitting addition to the article, and thats why I have made a link from the article to these two interview audio files. (docentballhorn)talk to me
- keep otrs pending. the releases are personality releases. for deceased people not necessary. see also are interviews copyrighted try to memorialize oral permission in an email, via the com:OTRS method. and engage uploaders to encourage them to improve their metadata rather than delete first and ask questions later. Slowking4 § Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 18:05, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- I would be OK with restoring this if and when we get a free license from the interviewer. The question of copyright on interviews is open and varies from country to country, but I think that going for a license from the interviewee's heirs is too much. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:06, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: It's been over three weeks and there is no sign of an OTRS license from the interviewer, so these should b e deleted. They can be restored if the license arrives. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:47, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Jcb as no source (No source since)
Worth a deletion discussion as the file is widely used, both across the internet and Wikimedia projects. The portrait is likely to have been the official photo taken in 1937 when he became Archbishop of Zagreb. With no named photographer, this would be public domain. Fæ (talk) 10:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as long as authorship information is missing. 'Anonymous work' should not be confused with 'there is no name in our author field'. Jcb (talk) 10:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Supply some evidence that reasonable effort would produce a photographers name. Commons' policies are not written so that we have to illogically prove a negative and the context of this very widely reproduced portrait having no identifiable official church photographer named anywhere obvious, makes it easy to justify "reasonable effort" even if this were a courtroom. --Fæ (talk) 11:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Information may be in some church archive. 'Reasonable effort' is not something like 'searching 10 minutes with Google'. Jcb (talk) 12:03, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- I suggest you contact someone in Zagreb to do the research needed then. In the meantime the photograph can be kept in good faith on Commons as "unknown photographer". Commons has the same concept of 'unknown photographer' as exists in international IP law, which allows for "reasonable" effort. The interpretation being presented here would ensure that no photograph could be assessed as "unknown" so long as a human pressed the shutter button. The 'no source' tags and DRs being insisted on, disrupt Common in a highly unnecessary and tendentious way. Perhaps the response should be an essay on the subject which can be transcluded every time this type of ad absurdum argument is made. --Fæ (talk) 12:18, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Information may be in some church archive. 'Reasonable effort' is not something like 'searching 10 minutes with Google'. Jcb (talk) 12:03, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
- Supply some evidence that reasonable effort would produce a photographers name. Commons' policies are not written so that we have to illogically prove a negative and the context of this very widely reproduced portrait having no identifiable official church photographer named anywhere obvious, makes it easy to justify "reasonable effort" even if this were a courtroom. --Fæ (talk) 11:53, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Croatian law makes images PD if they were published before 1970. However, we have no publication date for this and this is not a halftone, so it was scanned from a photographic print. While it is almost certain that the subject had photographs of him published, our rules require proof beyond a significant doubt that this one was published. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:56, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
- Undeleted: per request. Natuur12 (talk) 14:26, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
