Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2017/06/12

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

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

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Archive
Archive June 12th, 2017

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ztc.jpg

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

Sainsoundclips

[edit]

These files were uploaded by me on behalf of Sain Records LTD. About 7,500 clips were uploaded and a OTRS statement (Ticket#2017050910011681) giving permission is pending. However the copyright holder has since informed us that they do not have the rights to the tracks above. Therefore they must be removed ASAP as this is a breach of copyright. Many thanks and sorry for the inconvenience Jason.nlw (talk) 13:18, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:18, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

copyvio - same as http://www.ariseindiaforum.org/lord-rama-fact-or-fiction-part-i/ which has a copyright notice Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:08, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Whatever this is, it's not in scope. - Reventtalk 18:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Wikipedia zero case. -- ~ Nahid Talk 15:34, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

va cambiato Csarvenezia (talk) 09:14, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader request. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:00, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

I accidentally a crooked and wrong PIC uploaded again sorry Dodoman (talk) 19:43, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader request. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:00, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's not my photo Ayoub Fajraoui (talk) 08:17, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted by Daphne Lantier: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing

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

Personal image, copied from Panoramio, out of scope. Gauss (talk) 20:32, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --shizhao (talk) 00:47, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

pictures with minors without written consent of parents Herzi Pinki (talk) 21:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --shizhao (talk) 00:47, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Commons:Derivative works from music. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:22, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Derivative works from music. Sartnuphon (talk) 10:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:36, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like https://i.ytimg.com/vi/U4JaaJqrY_M/maxresdefault.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. -- Geagea (talk) 04:49, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

blurry and unusable picture, out of scope 79.251.133.235 18:01, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

unscharf - Was hat das mit Wiesbaden zu tun? Stadtlichtpunkte (talk) 18:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:27, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Appears to be from http://www.pbase.com/helenpb/image/161929774, available in its original JPG format Ytoyoda (talk) 03:16, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Taken from Instagram: http://www.thepicta.com/media/1358306957940950179_144382061 Ytoyoda (talk) 03:18, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Taken from Instagram: http://www.thepicta.com/media/1136355752858642008_204316816 Ytoyoda (talk) 03:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Johann Chavez (talk · contribs)

[edit]

1/ the image have a watermark with the name of an unknown artist therefore the images are likely out of scope.
2/ If the image are old enough to be in PD then author(s)/date(s)/country(ies) must be provided in order to determine the copyright statut, otherwise the images lacks of permission from the artist(s) (see com:OTRS)

Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:55, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Johann Chavez (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Same reasons as the previous request above.

Mahir256 (talk) 15:41, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: and blocked. --Jcb (talk) 16:06, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Ohiohi123 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Files are unlikely to be own work, since the person displayed on them (and her boobs) is a porn actress.

·×ald·es 05:47, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be uploader's own work as claimed. Same picture appears e.g. in http://www.famousfix.com/topic/petri-walli with a yellow box over the guitar. This picture may still have remnants of the box blurred out. Same uploader has previously also uploaded "pics from the net" and claimed them to be free. Jmk (talk) 06:29, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Nbknmt (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Screenshots of Facebook-owned webpages and non-free software (Facebook javascript, specifically).

- Reventtalk 06:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by CHNWJD (talk · contribs)

[edit]

spam, useless

shizhao (talk) 06:56, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

non-free logo Ionutzmovie (talk) 14:37, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 01:28, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Why is this exactly under a free license? No reason to belive the design is not copyrighted Discasto talk 06:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

"صورة لحساب فيسبوك" = "Image for Facebook account". Not in scope. - Reventtalk 08:02, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope Commons is not a social media site ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 14:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by ArgGamer2016 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

No evidence of any of these logotypes being released with a free license

Discasto talk 09:03, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by ArgGamer2016 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

All the flags seem to be fictional and I couldn't determine what the map is supposed to be either. Some of the names are of real places, but no connection with the flags. All but one descriptions are the same, saying it is own work, the outlier Flag of Rotherdam states "ciudad ficticia" – fictional city. Most likely uploader's personal fantasy world for a game/story, therefore out of scope.

TFerenczy (talk) 21:52, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:18, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

company logo, restricted permission, not for commons Tagmic (talk) 09:18, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is clearly an album cover, so I fail to see how it can be own work, Equivalent at English Wikipedia w:File:BBLiveLondonCover.jpg is non-free. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:37, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Just another non-free image from en-wiki Ronhjones  (Talk) 21:23, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by WaPu (talk · contribs)

[edit]

I have started this DR to force the uploader to correctly license these images. None of them are "own work" as claimed. All are from https://echo.jpl.nasa.gov/ and are covered by JPL's Image Use Policy at https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/imagepolicy/. All of them should be licensed {{PD-USGov-NASA}}.

.     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:33, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jameslwoodward: If you have identified the source, and know what the files are: why not update the metadata yourself and leave feedback on the users page? This seems to be using a heavy-handed and not welcoming tactic against a new user for something that fundamentally belongs on our project. Sadads (talk) 14:03, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it seems heavy handed to me also, but there is no other way. Changing the license on a file where "own work" is claimed is up to the user, not others. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:18, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of scope - not useful. The description (in Dutch) makes clear that the image was part of a promotional talk for a rendez-vous site. Henxter (talk) 13:32, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:06, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope Commons is not a social media site ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 13:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:06, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:22, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:06, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope Commons is not a social media site ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 14:22, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:06, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file is bad. For there are not more sources inside.125.82.15.56 13:21, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

.......LOL. That's all I can say. This file has permission from YG Entertainment. Teemeah (talk) 19:15, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Kept, the file is used in multiple projects, apparently it isn't so bad. Taivo (talk) 11:46, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file have no sources, In fact, My intention to delete this is for wanted REVENGE. Beast Donald (talk) 14:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: still no reason for deletion. --Didym (talk) 15:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal images, copied from Panoramio. (Also most pictures were taken twice, once without and once with the depicted gentleman.)

Gauss (talk) 19:42, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:11, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

De school draagt inmiddels een ander logo KleinFrankrijk (talk) 20:04, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 00:12, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

De school heeft inmiddels een ander logo KleinFrankrijk (talk) 07:03, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion - no new arguments. --Jcb (talk) 22:09, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 20:34, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 00:13, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 20:41, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 00:13, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I canot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 20:56, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 00:14, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 20:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 00:14, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 21:01, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 00:13, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 21:05, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 00:13, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 21:06, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 00:13, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 21:08, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 00:13, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 21:12, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 00:14, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 21:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 00:14, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused photo, out of scope. TherasTaneel (talk) 22:20, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:15, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused photo, out of scope. TherasTaneel (talk) 22:21, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:15, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused photo, out of scope. TherasTaneel (talk) 22:24, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:15, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

tourist selfies in front of tourist's sights, encyclopaedic use unlikely. In most cases there are equivalent images of the same scene from the same photographer.

Herzi Pinki (talk) 22:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

tourist selfies in front of tourist's sights, encyclopaedic use unlikely. In most cases there are equivalent images of the same scene from the same photographer.

Herzi Pinki (talk) 09:15, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:18, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

tourist selfies in front of tourist's sights, encyclopaedic use unlikely. In most cases there are equivalent images of the same scene from the same photographer.

Herzi Pinki (talk) 21:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

tourist selfies in front of tourist's sights, encyclopaedic use unlikely. In most cases there are equivalent images of the same scene from the same photographer.

Herzi Pinki (talk) 15:53, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

tourist selfies in front of tourist's sights, encyclopaedic use unlikely. In most cases there are equivalent images of the same scene from the same photographer.

Herzi Pinki (talk) 07:33, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:06, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

tourist selfies in front of tourist's sights, encyclopaedic use unlikely. In most cases there are equivalent images of the same scene from the same photographer.

Herzi Pinki (talk) 11:29, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 18:29, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused photo, out of scope. TherasTaneel (talk) 23:16, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused photo, out of scope. TherasTaneel (talk) 23:18, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused photo, out of scope. TherasTaneel (talk) 23:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused photo, out of scope. TherasTaneel (talk) 23:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused photo, out of scope. TherasTaneel (talk) 23:22, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright by translator Yuri Klyuchnikov until 2063 year because of his rehabilitation on 1992 year (see [1]). According to PD-Russia if the author was subjected to repression and rehabilitated posthumously, countdown of copyright protection began not from the death date, but from the rehabilitation date. 89.178.0.232 15:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See please here: {{PD-1996}}. Servers in the US.--Arxivist (talk) 16:44, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
PD-1996: «it was in the public domain in its home country on the URAA date». But it wasn't in the PD in Russia on the URAA date (because it's still copyrighted in Russia). 89.178.0.232 20:48, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Rehabilitation in 1992 was for the first judgement (1934 year; just 3 years of exile). It was not rehabilitated for second judgement (1938 year, shooting — По второй судимости материалы архивного дела Ю.В. Ключникова до сих пор подлежат пересмотру на предмет обоснованности осуждения), so it's not repressed and rehabilitated posthumously in terms of Russian copyright. Artem.komisarenko (talk) 05:57, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
He was rehabilitated for second judgement on 2001 year, see memo.ru. So copyright until 2072. 89.178.0.232 22:03, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So, it was it PD worldwide since 1989 (+50 years by old Russian copyright law) or even early (by USSR laws) and prior 2001 (including USA 1996) then it became copyrighted in Russia until 2072. It looks it should moved to some local storage because: a) it's still PD in USA and most countries; b) it's copyrighted in Russia now. Artem.komisarenko (talk) 05:38, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 11:24, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not in scope. - Reventtalk 17:07, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 11:26, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope, Commons is not a social media. Arthur Crbz (talk) 17:17, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's also a copyvio https://frama.link/XkVSNkSx Bastenbas (talk) 17:20, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per above. --Sealle (talk) 11:27, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Blurry, 1080p resolution, possible video screenshot. Train2104 (talk) 00:38, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by SANTHOSH KUMAR EEE (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Too much tilted to be really useful : out of scope

Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:34, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No proper source , no permission, possibility of copyvios ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 08:33, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 14:09, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Сомнения в авторстве и лицензии. Автор фото и изображённая на снимке персона-один человек. Dogad75 (talk) 10:56, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Нет, автор - его сын, тоже известный фотохудожник Евгений Глобенко младший http://globenko.ru/bio Shu40

Необходимо разрешение сына, Евгения Глобенко младшего, на публикацию данного фото под свободными лицензиями, см. подробнее OTRS/ru. С уважением, --Dogad75 (talk) 12:42, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 14:10, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ticket:2017060310010968 The client is not the author of this picture and is unable to contact the author. No permission. Arthur Crbz (talk) 13:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 14:12, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

According to Ticket:2017041810014752, the uploader is not the author of the file and so doesn't have permission. Arthur Crbz (talk) 13:47, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 14:12, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

poor quality, blurry Hiddenhauser (talk) 13:50, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vorschlag: ich bearbeite es noch, wenn's Dir dann immer noch nicht gefällt, kannst Du von mir aus die Löschung beantragen. --Ziegler175 (talk) 13:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: seems to be in scope. --Sealle (talk) 14:18, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

this upload is a mistake (no fop in japan for sculpture) Puramyun31 (talk) 13:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 14:18, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

I uploaded it. It looks like I got the file permissions wrong. I've created a different one for use in the page on Wikipedia (Chess Today) instead so this isn't needed. Imnikrist (talk) 14:04, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per above. --Sealle (talk) 14:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Авторство сомнительно -- Tomasina (talk) 14:05, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of scope, though definitely PD-ineligible. --Sealle (talk) 14:23, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Yacine dzz (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://static2.rswebsols.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/DOOGEE-F5-4G-Phablet-Image-Gallery-8.jpg.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:06, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 14:24, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope Commons is not a social media site ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 14:12, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files by User:DanielaN18

[edit]

Probable copyvio: low resolution photographs uploaded by new user for some kind of gaming purpose. --Sitacuisses (talk) 02:39, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This image is out of scope because it is not in use, not categorized and a photo of the moon, labeled sun. It is also blurry, and small. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination. --lNeverCry 02:10, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: low quality photo of common subject. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 14:54, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like https://i.ytimg.com/vi/B14kCpqYrOQ/maxresdefault.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:21, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 14:54, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looks like the picture is taken from a photograph. Non own work. Possibility of copyvios ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 14:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The wiki page is basically a kind of biography, kind of a tribute for his work as R.R shinde is no more.People recognize him by that photo as he looked like that before his demise. Request you all to let me upload the picture. There will be no copy right issue and the picture is no where available on web. Its my collection. The pic is a hard copy so I have taken the photo from my mobile and have uploaded it.


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 14:55, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Commons is not a social media, seems out of scope. Arthur Crbz (talk) 14:33, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Photo of commons user, as per {{User page image}}. It is standard practice to allow a few files. The file also contains the en:Wikipedia Monument. Clearly in COM:SCOPE. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:07, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Per Steinsplitter, absolutely not understandable this DR. I agree to have 3 personal pictures. The WMF has a "new"(?) major goal, promote and form the foundations for community growth. What you do is the absolutely contrary. -- User: Perhelion 20:35, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep, obviously. @Arthur Crbz: if you link to the policy document in question (and also ensure that you have read and understood them before raising the DR), it may help avoid raising spurious DRs. From COM:SCOPE: "by custom the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal Commons user page is allowed." I literally can't imagine an image that more exemplifies the spirit of this exemption, given it even contains a Wikipedia statue. Storkk (talk) 08:10, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Sealle (talk) 14:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Gaffky (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Photographs of game players uploaded as self. Possibility of copyvios. If own work kindly send the permissions via OTRS

✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 14:33, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • No sufficient evidence for deletion presented. Did you find the same picture published somewhere else? "Photographs of game players uploaded as self. Possibility of copyvios." - you can always go to a ballpark and take pictures of players... As far as I can see, no concrete evidence suggests these are stolen files. --202.214.231.201 00:23, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Sealle (talk) 14:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copytighted file. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 00:30, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not own work, missing EXIF kovox90      00:38, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Imagem errada. Preciso retirar as guias Jasão (talk) 00:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Feito Retirei as janelas. Jasão (talk) 00:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not own work. This image with the same dimensions was posted by Iran Newspaper a day earlier, no indication that it is under a free license seb26 (talk) 01:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Porque es un personaje que ya no está en el partido verde, y no es figura pública ni tiene trascendencia que este aqui-. Oscarinaguayo (talk) 01:36, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:56, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Speedily deletable as 'encyclopedic content', and not in scope on Commons. Since it would be perfectly suitable (good, even) on the English Wikipedia, please let this run for a week to give the author (who I have pinged) a chance to move it over. Thanks. - Reventtalk 02:02, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No evidence of licence, more than meets COM:TOO in UK Colombavia (talk) 02:33, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Previously published at [2], unlikely to be own work. It was previously nominated at Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_on_Unused_user_page_images_-_Set_1 but found to be in scope. --ghouston (talk) 03:38, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Twitter does not indicate that the photo can be reused in any medium. Soosie. (talk) 03:56, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

In the photo is the watermark showing the original author. Soosie. (talk) 03:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyvio from http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=125&artikel=1410787 Sjö (talk) 04:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Umieściłem plik bez wyraźnego pozwolenia, zostałem poproszony przez panią Igę o usunięcie. Popik (talk) 07:09, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

The en.wiki article (en:IDEALOGUE) was deleted several times as it was deemed promotional. The image is currently unused. ~barakokula31 (talk) 07:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

old, unused phylogenetic tree: can be better done with wikitext Kosher Nostra Scam (talk) 08:00, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

A flag that does not exist in real life. A user is inventing flags and fooling WPs, this time the hy one. E4024 (talk) 08:13, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

file licensed Ayoub Fajraoui (talk) 08:14, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope Commons is not a social media site ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 08:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Out of Commons Scope! Sankoswal (talk) 12:53, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope. Unclear image. Object is the person ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 08:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Querying on the basis of originality, given the infinity symbol substituted for double o in the wordmark. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:01, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:58, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seems surpasses threshold of originality in Korea - it has own characteristics as a product of mental efforts, and it can be distinguished from existing ones. It have been deleted in some times but now got recreated. (Commons:Deletion requests/File:Woollim Entertainment.png) StayC, Bae173 and music fans [ talk to me ] 08:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Deleting the previously deleted file. --Minoraxtalk 12:08, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

poor quality, blurry Hiddenhauser (talk) 10:47, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:58, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP in France; unused personal photo - out of project scope. XXN, 11:09, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:58, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

not good enough Øyvind Holmstad (talk) 12:21, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:58, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Old work, which is unlikely to be own work by the uploader; copyright definitely not expired since published less than 70 years ago. 62.65.58.38 12:43, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:58, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem to delete this file which was uploaded prematurely. I tried to delete it myself but was unable to find it. Lerique-Koechlin (talk)


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:58, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:16, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope Commons is not a social media site ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 14:18, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://smovilidad.edomex.gob.mx/sites/smovilidad.edomex.gob.mx/files/images/secretario_.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:26, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seems to be incorrect version of File:Gironde - Intercommunalités.png. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Request by author/uploader. -- Luuva (talk) 14:31, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Thekiller160 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Seems to be replaced with new versions.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:34, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 19:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Alphalauf (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope Commons is not a social media site

✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 14:36, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Alphalauf (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unused files. Promotional for not notable company Alphalauf. Out of project scope.

Estopedist1 (talk) 06:36, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 19:35, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope Commons is not a social media site ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 14:36, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope Commons is not a social media site ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 14:38, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope Commons is not a social media site ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 14:38, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Bad filename, see also file:Matera BW 2016-10-15 14-04-19 stitch.jpg Berthold Werner (talk) 14:47, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Disney Channel logos

[edit]

Uploaded under non-fair use and with misleading names in Spanish. --Bankster (talk) 15:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of scope - shows more reflections that content Viewdusk (talk) 15:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK! The viewing angle was difficult and the object was in full light.- Sorry, this picture has been sent by mistake, best regard. --Pierre André (talk) 20:53, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, perfect.--Viewdusk (talk) 11:54, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This German photograph is dated ca. 1930, a source is named, but no author. The photographer of a ca. 1930 photograph could well have lived beyond 1946, which would mean the photograph is still protected in its country of origin. So the file should be deleted per the precautionary principle. And no, that the photographer is said to be "unknown" does not make the photo "anonymous" in a legal sense. The Anonymous-EU tag (used here) and similar tags aren't applicable to German works, since German law says that pre-1995 anonymous works are only really anonymous if the author (here: the photographer) was never publicly disclosed anywhere, not even in a lecture or similar. One cannot prove that, so pre-1995 "anonymous" works from Germany are not suitable for Commons (or de.wp). Rosenzweig τ 15:40, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

저작권 침해(Copyright violations) http://sports.mk.co.kr/view.php?no=411507&year=2013 -- 메이 (토론) 15:55, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

autopromo, out of scope Pibwl (talk) 15:57, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Является дупликатом. Существует аналогичное изображение, которое имеет качество лучше и загружено ранее։ File:RR3415-0002.png Vahe (talk) 16:17, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate of original version of File:Fox Umbrella Shop.jpg, before improvements were made to it. Ham II (talk) 16:24, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Является дупликатом. Существует аналогичное изображение, которое имеет качество лучше и загружено ранее։ File:RR3415-0001.png Vahe (talk) 16:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

DR started to verify claimed 'own work': rather small-sized format, but also missing EXIF data to verify origin and claimed 'own work', hence, potentially non-free content - your opinions ?  Comment: file not in use at Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 17:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not in scope. - Reventtalk 17:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not in scope. - Reventtalk 17:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No permission from JCG Jcb (talk) 17:24, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

DR started to verify claimed 'own work': rather small-sized format, one-file-upload, but also missing EXIF data to verify origin and claimed 'own work', hence, potentially non-free content - your opinions ?  Comment: file not in use at Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 17:26, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal video, not in scope. - Reventtalk 17:26, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Koníček123 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

copyvios/out of scope

/St1995 17:30, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:01, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 17:32, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No source. No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 17:34, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Delete the Afgani copyright license {{PD-Afghanistan}} no longer applies based on User talk:Officer#Stamp review this discussion. Ww2censor (talk) 17:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Á

No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. No indication that the author woud have died before 1947. Jcb (talk) 17:43, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Es handelt sich um eine Postkarte aus der Zeit vor dem 1. Weltkrieg, also über 100 Jahre alt. Benutzer: Wikswat, 12. Juni 2017
That may be, but copyright lasts until 70 years after the death of the author. In case we do not have authorship information, we use 120 years as a cut-off. Jcb (talk) 20:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Tengo problemas de privacidad PaolaPiani (talk) 17:44, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

this upload is a mistake (no fop in japan for sculpture) Puramyun31 (talk) 17:48, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

DR started to verify claimed 'own work': rather thumbnail format, but also missing EXIF data to verify origin and claimed 'own work', hence, potentially non-free content - your opinions ?  Comment: file not in use at Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 17:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small unused personal photo without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. Out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 17:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

If the author was died in 1956, then he is not 70 years dead. Copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 18:00, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small unused personal photo, the uploader's only contribution. Maybe out of project scope, maybe copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 18:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

unknown notability, family collection photo (surely not an own work), unused, no cat, sole upload Pibwl (talk) 18:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can see the uploader provided explanation in discussion, but still I'm afraid the person is not encyclopaedic. Pibwl (talk) 15:38, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reading my reply. I'm not sure what more detail would assist in resolving your concerns. Given the original of the photo sits at my father's home, my father has other photos of his father--my grandfather--at his home, he acknowledges this photo and others as his father, the provenance of this explanation would appear to be satisfactory. Please advise.


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Mikhail Ryazanov (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Derivatives of non-free content, authors died in 1989 / 2007.

Sealle (talk) 18:37, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As can be easily seen, these files are just better variants of
Why would not you decide upon those first? They are not even nominated so far. — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 22:22, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[3] Thanks for adding these, now nominated. Sealle (talk) 04:44, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unscharf - Nicht erkennbar, wo dieses Bild aufgenommen ist. Stadtlichtpunkte (talk) 18:42, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

DR started to verify claimed 'own work': one-file-upload and missing EXIF data to verify origin and claimed 'own work', but also potentially 'advertising', hence, potentially non-free content and/or out of scope Wikimedia Commons - your opinions ?  Comment: file not in use at Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 18:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not in scope. - Reventtalk 18:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unscharf und verwackelt Stadtlichtpunkte (talk) 18:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of scope: unreadable Fruchtziger (talk) 19:04, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Advertising material (if dubious, see prior use at en:Wrap advertising. - Reventtalk 19:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unscharf - Wo in Wiesbaden? Stadtlichtpunkte (talk) 19:11, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

DR started to verify claimed 'own work': rather thumbnail format, but also missing EXIF data to verify origin and claimed 'own work', hence, potentially non-free content - your opinions ?  Comment: file not in use at Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 19:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

DR started to verify claimed 'own work': rather thumbnail format, but also missing EXIF data to verify origin and claimed 'own work', hence, potentially non-free content - your opinions ?  Comment: file not in use at Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 19:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

DR started to verify claimed 'own work': rather thumbnail format, but also missing EXIF data to verify origin and claimed 'own work', hence, potentially non-free content - your opinions ?  Comment: file not in use at Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 19:17, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unscharfes Bild Stadtlichtpunkte (talk) 19:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not in scope. - Reventtalk 19:26, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

DR started to verify claimed 'own work': one-file-upload, but also missing EXIF data to verify origin and claimed 'own work', hence, potentially non-free content - your opinions ?  Comment: file not in use at Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 19:34, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Apparently France holds the copyright to images of this monument. Wilson44691 (talk) 19:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Является дупликатом File:AM-Noah's Ark-2014-5000dram.png Vahe (talk) 19:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP in the US Elisfkc (talk) 20:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP in France Elisfkc (talk) 20:36, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP in Italy Elisfkc (talk) 20:36, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP for artwork in Russia Elisfkc (talk) 20:37, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:04, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Conflicting information about author, no permission: "Portrait by Ben Wolf"/"Author Alexander Wetzlaff". Sitacuisses (talk) 23:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

I'm not the brightest bulb in the pack, but as far as I can tell, this image, which is described by User:Pleiotrope as being of protein COG8 and based on 3G5K is actually the structure of "Actinonin-bound HsPDF structure" PDB ID 3G5K as reported in the paper at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2782631/ Somebody is wrong. Whether it is me, pleiotrope or the authors of the paper is uncertain, to my confused mind. Pleiotrope, please check this. I think the structure must be correct, it just isn't of COG8 and shouldn't be in the COG8 disinfobox. JeanOhm (talk) 22:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Suspected not own work. No indication that the photographer sourced as Kasper Wejse is same as uploader "Milostar". TherasTaneel (talk) 23:02, 12 June 2017 (UTC) TherasTaneel (talk) 23:02, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Suspected not own work. No indication that the photographer sourced as Kasper Wejse is same as uploader "Milostar". TherasTaneel (talk) 23:03, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Suspected not own work. TherasTaneel (talk) 23:05, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Suspected not own work, based on other files uploaded by user. TherasTaneel (talk) 23:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work by uploader, given his other uploads (see above). Sitacuisses (talk) 23:55, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 20:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Movie Poster. پوستر فیلم Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:47, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 20:57, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Suspected not own work. Seems same file marked previously as a possible copyright violation, reuploaded under new title. TherasTaneel (talk) 22:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 20:58, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Suspected not own work. Seems same file marked previously as a possible copyright violation, reuploaded under new title. TherasTaneel (talk) 22:50, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 20:58, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Conflicting information about author, no permission: "Portrait by Ben Wolf"/"Author Alexander Wetzlaff". Sitacuisses (talk) 23:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 20:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Conflicting information about author, no permission: "Portrait by Ben Wolf"/"Author Alexander Wetzlaff". Sitacuisses (talk) 23:55, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 20:59, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unscharfes Bild Stadtlichtpunkte (talk) 19:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 00:41, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Nicht erkennbar, wo das aufgenommen ist. Stadtlichtpunkte (talk) 19:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 00:41, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looks like a low resolution version of a professional image. I doubt it is own work. Avron (talk) 19:29, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 01:05, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Only simple logos can be in commons without OTRS-permission. In addition, Romecorp is not mentioned neither in en.wiki nor in es.wiki, out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 19:31, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 01:05, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

The uploader claimed, that the image is in public domain, because it is older than 70 years. That's incorrect. Venezuela demands 60 years from publishing, not 70 years from creation. Evidence for publishing more than 60 years ago is needed. In addition, she lived for years in France and I'm not sure, that it was first published in Venezuela. Taivo (talk) 19:41, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I got an answer on talkpage of the request. With help of Google translation I understood, that the photo is widely used, but first publishing country and time are unknown. Taivo (talk) 07:26, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 01:09, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

mass-upload of panoramio streams of poor quality, rather small-sized and replaceable by any image within the related category, hence, doubtful educational usefulness and out of scope Wikimedia Commons - your opinions ?  Comment: file not in use at Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 20:46, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep This file is in use at the Commons on OSM layer. It documents a specific street scene. The quality is sufficient. --Sitacuisses (talk) 20:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Hystrix (talk) 01:12, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused and poor quality Ratherous (talk) 01:00, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What is so poor about this file? I don't really see a reason for deletion. It may not be up to date, but doesn't it show a historic situation? --Sitacuisses (talk) 02:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There are already files that show the history of NATO's membership with much higher quality png or svg files. This map is very poor in quality and isn't used. No reason to keep. --Ratherous (talk) 13:46, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What other file exactly do you refer to? It's not obvious to me. It should be the same language and region. But that still wouldn't be a sufficient reason for deletion. The file was published under a free license at de.wp in 2005. Apart from wiki projects, it may be in use by other websites. --Sitacuisses (talk) 16:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Appears to be an upsampling from a smaller image. Has significant pixelization and is fuzzy even at this small size. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:32, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is not a very good diagram of the celestial spheres, as it leaves out Saturn, which is always included, and the corruptible sphere of water. Beland (talk) 05:45, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Beland: Please leave images belonging to Wikisource projects alone. We are in the business of reproducing public domain material in whatever condition we are lucky to find them. Popular Science Monthly (PSM) is an ongoing project since 2009 and of the approximately 9,000 images of this project, you will find many that will not meet criteria applied to other Commons images. I am also active in replacing and repairing images as I proofread the text. You can see my contributions of having replaced or upgraded hundreds, if not thousands of images. I am now working on Volume 67 and it will be some months before I get to volume 75. However, if the quality is not to your liking, then you are welcome to contribute by repairing the image. — Ineuw talk 06:12, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ineuw: What is the purpose of uploading these images? Are they illustrating a text-only version? Otherwise, we have plenty of drawings of geocentric models of celestial spheres that are more comprehensive than this one. I don't know which page this image is from; if I could put my finger on it I could tell if you if Saturn is included in the original. But it's partly also just drawn wrong. -- Beland (talk) 08:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Beland: The image was replaced with a non Google, undamaged copy I found this morning on IA. Will replace the images which warrant replacement when I reach volume 75 and thanks for pointing out the damaged image.— Ineuw talk 20:44, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion -- problems fixed with new image. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:33, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

C'est une maison privée, les propriétaires ne souhaitent pas qu'elle figure sur wikipedia ou wikimedia. merci 90.86.232.24 12:09, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pas d, objection contre la suppression, Havang(nl) (talk) 15:00, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: We rarely take images down at the request of the subject and never when the request comes from an anonymous IP user, who may be a vandal or someone working against the interests of the subject. The owners of the house may make a request using OTRS. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:36, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

meaningless images, uploaded by bot, no possible usage

Stolbovsky (talk) 12:30, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Да ладно вам, Atsirlin, честно не заметил, что это не панорамиошный файл, он в самом конце списка был (где было штук 40 с панорамио и пару обычных). Используется и славно. Не сердитесь :) Обсуждения для того и существуют, чтобы вот такие ошибки не проскакивали. --Stolbovsky (talk) 10:02, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
First, you have not crossed the file out even when you know that it is in use. This makes me believe that you want to have this file deleted independent of its usage. You basically try to impose your own views and policies on other projects, tell us what we should use and what not, which is such a common situation here on Commons.
Second, let me remind you that we do not receive any notification when a file used in our project is nominated for deletion here. It is only by chance that we learn about such deletion requests and correct your "mistakes", while more often we see the file already deleted, and we do not even know why. The cost of your "mistakes" can be quite high, and therefore we will take all possible measures to prevent such "mistakes" in the future. --Alexander (talk) 12:00, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: two, one kept - per discussion. --Sealle (talk) 12:30, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:14, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Author: checking with possible sources
  • Date: 1938
  • Country: France
  • Copyrights: a priori Charles Koechlin Family

Lerique-Koechlin (talk)


Deleted: Copyrights almost never bleong to the subject -- this copyright almost certainly belongs to the photographer's heirs. 1938 is far too recent to assume that the photographer died before 1947. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:38, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by T.hodel (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope Commons is not a personal file hosting site

✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 14:16, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Event of openGLAM CH and archives in order to work (hack) open data --User:T.hodel.
Hi, these are photos of a hackathon organized in partnership with OpenGLAM CH. It's an event that helps sensitizing heritage institutions to the opening up of their content (including uploading it to Wikimedia Commons). We typically use such event photos for our outreach activities at the address of heritage institutions and now and then also for contributions to the Wikimedia GLAM Newsletter. So, please don't delete them! --Beat Estermann (talk) 14:47, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment@Beat Estermann and T.hodel: If so said above shall be true the administrators will close the deletion as kept. Thanks for your comments. Admins please have a look at it --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 15:06, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete. No author / copyright holder permission. @T.hodel and Beat Estermann: see COM:OTRS. Sealle (talk) 14:29, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment@Sealle:

Photos were taken by the State Archives of Zurich, upload by myself as representative of the archives --User:T.hodel.

Deleted: Images of identifiable people at a private event. No permission from the photographer. Some of them show copyrighted material on the screen. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:42, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:26, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded reduced file size for fast web load. Could provide original image, but it is not cropped. prajantr


Deleted: The sweatshirt has a copyright which this infringes. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:44, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:29, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Author was Paul Drago, this is a picture I took of my father around 1982 in Champaign, Illinois, USA. I am the owner of the picture and freely supplied to Wikimedia Commons and mentioned so when I posted it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Genie Ology (talk • contribs) 18:52, 12 June 2017‎ (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: In that case, please scan the paper photo again at much larger pixel size and upload it using the same file name. This size is not useful. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:47, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Why should this picture be public domain as stated by the license-template? Taken in 1926 isn't a proof, that the photographer died within 20 years following this work. As precautional principle I think the picture can't be here without further authorship-information. Quedel (talk) 21:09, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:50, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 21:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: The image caption mentions that he was governor for four years beginning in 1939, so it cannot be PD-1923. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:54, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

DR started to verify claimed 'own work': rather small-sized format, but also missing EXIF data to verify origin and claimed 'own work', hence, potentially non-free content - your opinions ?  Comment: file not in use at Wikimedia projects, and see also File:Ooty Mountain houses.jpg, Roland zh (talk) 19:22, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Uploads by this user are consistent [4]. Some have Exif data (Samsung smartphone). [5] [6] [7]. Watermarks are consistent with the user's name. It's rather poor quality, but please don't invent false reasons for your deletion requests. --Sitacuisses (talk) 19:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as per User:Sitacuisses. P 1 9 9   14:23, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. No indication that the author would have died before 1947. Jcb (talk) 21:13, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: This image is well into the Public Domain and no longer covered by copyright. Arthur Morrison is the subject not the photographer. Looks like it is a studio shot, commissioned by Arthur Morrison. Back then, the UK copyright lay with the person that commissioned the photograph not the photographer. The commissioners copyright never got extended beyond 50 years. You could try checking with Arthur Morrison Society to see if they think they are committing copyright violations or if they have the same view as I. A hell of a lot of images will disappear from WC if we find out we have been wrong all these years. So go for it! Do some UK copyright research - then re-post. 13:37, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Please provide some evidence that the copyright would indeed belong to the depicted person and not to the author. Saying that it "looks like" a studio shot does not establish anything about the copyright situation. So even if your claim about the "UK copyright lay[sic]", for which you didn't provide any reference, would be true, there is still no evidence that the picture was 'commissioned'. For pictures from PMA+70 countries with unknown author we use 120 years as a cut-off, see {{PD-old-assumed}}. This picture does not appear to date from before 1897. Jcb (talk) 14:53, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are the one putting this up for deletion so you are the one to show this falls foul of UK copyright --right? So far, you have just put this up for deletion without any UK copyright reasoning at all. Do you have any understanding of the UK copyright laws at all? If you you want us to jump through your hoops, then I have to ask: what did your last slave die of]. We take copyright very seriously here on WC (and I put time into this myself and ensure that a lot copyvios gets deleted). If you have found a valid over-sight then by all means point it out. Do your homework and not post a whimsy. Don't leave it to other editors to do this for you. P.g.champion (talk) 16:36, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's the other way round. In order to keep the file, you have to show that it's free. The UK is a PMA+70 country, which you can e.g. see in this map. So as long as we have no indication at all that the author would have died before 1947, it will be a  Delete. Jcb (talk) 21:02, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
EXPLANATORY NOTE (their emphasis not mine). Quote: “Paragraph 6(1) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 prevents copyright from subsisting in an artistic work made before 1st June 1957 ” In simple words... Images that were already out of copyright could not have them extended to life +70 years. By al-means look for copyvios, because occasionally I have flagged some up for deletion myself, when I spot them. I restrict myself though, to look at just those images from the two countries I've taken the trouble to read through and understand their copyright laws in depth, so avoiding making your kind of error. Don't rely on Wikipedia maps for more resent photographs that fall into life + 70 years. WP is not a reliable reference – the written law is. So, it is still up to you to prove that the written UK & USA copyright laws are wrong. Hence, and until that time, this image is firmly in the public domain and can be Kept. P.g.champion (talk) 14:18, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the whole sentence before quoting the first part of it. Do you really think that this picture "was used, or intended to be used, as a model or pattern to be multiplied by an industrial process." - no, the "EXPLANATORY NOTE" you link to is not about pictures. Jcb (talk) 14:41, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh you're kidding me! Read the whole Act of 1988 through. P.g.champion (talk) 15:06, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: It is indeed true that under the 1911 act (at section 5a) the person commissioning a portrait or other photograph owns the copyright. However, it is equally true that it is up the uploader to prove beyond a significant doubt that the image is free. There are many twists and turns in the UK law that depend on the publishing history of the image and, as is pointed out above, whether it was a commissioned work or not. Since we are told nothing of the history of the image, I have to delete it. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:09, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 21:14, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:53, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 21:16, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:53, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 21:20, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:53, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

doesn't seem to be notable persons, or have other educational value... Pibwl (talk) 21:22, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   14:23, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Framawiki as no permission, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 21:26, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: undue suspicion. P 1 9 9   14:28, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Suspected not own work. TherasTaneel (talk) 22:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Undue suspicion, no signs of copyvio (not found on internet, large format, EXIF present, etc.). P 1 9 9   14:32, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Sourced as "Iben Mondrup", attributed to "Isak Hoffmeyer", yet uploader named "Peter Breum Sørensen". No permission stated. TherasTaneel (talk) 22:17, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 13:41, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Derivative of copyrighted book cover ✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 08:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What copyright? A simple cover with letters and a geometric design. Beneath any threshold of original work.  Keep --E4024 (talk) 09:09, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per E4024 (simple text, no graphics). Ruthven (msg) 14:10, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate and bad quality JonskiC (talk) 21:27, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JonskiC: Duplicate of what?? Use the {{Duplicate}} template please --Ruthven (msg) 14:11, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --PierreSelim (talk) 09:34, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]