Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2017/09/28
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
Ce n'est pas un travail personnel mais une copie d'acte officiel de 1979 Sammyday (talk) 07:15, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: withdrawn. --Krd 09:27, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Hardly own work by original uploader. No source for the base map, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 16:11, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Keep as per COM:DW#Maps: "The factual information, such as boundary lines and locations of landmarks, is supposedly unprotected. The organizing principle for presenting the information will often, if not always, be deemed an unprotected system or idea. Thus, many maps will apparently contain only unprotected elements." So especially in this case of a map with nothing but boundary outlines, the base map is irrelevant. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Such a city map is not just 'factual information'. I suppose you are unfamiliar with how maps are created? I admit that many US states are hardly more than a rectangle, but to create a map like this one, several choices have been made regarding the projection, in order to create the most suitable map. You could have been true if the earth would have been a flat disk, but it isn't. Jcb (talk) 16:35, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Your answer directly contradicts my quote above. Furthermore COM:DW#Maps states that "As a result of the court decisions, following parts of a map are in the public domain, and may be used freely: ... Geographic or topographic features. Those are facts, and facts aren't copyrightable." Your interpretation is far stricter than the law... --P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:45, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Such a city map is not just 'factual information'. I suppose you are unfamiliar with how maps are created? I admit that many US states are hardly more than a rectangle, but to create a map like this one, several choices have been made regarding the projection, in order to create the most suitable map. You could have been true if the earth would have been a flat disk, but it isn't. Jcb (talk) 16:35, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep you could have just looked in Category:Locator maps of municipalities of Brussels-Capital Region instead of nominating a 10 year old upload. This is a derivative work by User:Wester of a public domain map created by LennartBolks. Multichill (talk) 16:48, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, I see. I will see if I can clear up this mess. There appears to be a huge quantity of derivative works of this map with a bogus own work claim instead of proper source information. Jcb (talk) 17:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: resolved per Multichill. --Jcb (talk) 17:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Flicrwashed - uploaded to Flickr after last deletion File:Believers Church Jesus Well.jpg Ronhjones (Talk) 19:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: re-uploaded copyvio. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:59, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Picture is a duplicate uploaded under a different name by the same user with no source verification. Compare with the following: File:Marie Van Brittan Brown.png Blueclaw (talk) 22:22, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: no evidence this image is in public domain, see e.g. [1]. --Materialscientist (talk) 00:36, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Picture is a duplicate uploaded under a different name by the same user with no source verification. Compare with the following: File:Bessie Blount.gif Blueclaw (talk) 22:23, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Materialscientist (talk) 00:32, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Edited duplicate of another file uploaded by the same user with no verification of source. Compare to File:Richardspikes.jpg Blueclaw (talk) 22:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Materialscientist (talk) 00:31, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Unedited duplicate of another file uploaded by the same user with no verification of source. Compare to File:Roberfflemming.jpg Blueclaw (talk) 22:28, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: no source or evidence of copyright, ID is likely incorrect. --Materialscientist (talk) 00:37, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jason M. C., Han (talk · contribs)
[edit]Per COM:NOTHOST: Self-created artwork/personal images
- File:Autumn Sonata summerized by Jason's MCSA2 (attached to the file - Mozart C Sonata Autumn 2nd ).jpg
- File:In Fall - A season of Sea-openess.jpg
- File:Conciousness Sream of a hot summer.jpg
- File:2017 Spring Impression - Butterfly.pdf
Takeaway (talk) 07:26, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Delete No source for the images, out of scope anyway. Yann (talk) 08:54, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Comment @Yann: These files have not yet been deleted although the discussion has been marked as "closed". - Takeaway (talk) 09:34, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- I moved the header down. Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:42, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks! - Takeaway (talk) 09:48, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 07:49, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jason M. C., Han (talk · contribs)
[edit]Recreating previously deleted file -> https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3ADeletion_requests%2FFile%3AGrand_theory_for_Musical_Training.JPG&type=revision&diff=199484286&oldid=199398334
Takeaway (talk) 08:48, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:52, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jason M. C., Han (talk · contribs)
[edit]Per COM:NOTHOSThgvuvib: personal images of which some are claimed by uploader to be educational due to being used in the uploaders wikiversity articlles such as this one -> https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Portal:Impressionist_Visualizations_(for_musical_imaginations)_and_some_Sound_files
- File:Meng Meng with Christmas Uncle Jason in piano classroom.jpg
- File:Impressions of West Lake for further usagesjdjjdnjdjjdj whbdmxin Education -7.jpg
- File:Impressions of West Lake for further usages in Education -8.jpg
- File:Impressions of West Lake for further usages in Education -5.jpg
- File:Impressions of West Lake for further usages in Education -1.jpg
- File:Springvj I 🚞🚰 Festival for Rooster Year 2017.gif
- File:Metiral-way in Jason's life.gif
- File:Globalized impression of London.JPG
- File:International Cherry Blossom Festival of Lüshunkou in Dalian.JPG
Takeaway (talk) 08:59, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom. User blocked for vandalism. Wikimedia projects are not personal blogs. Yann (talk) 09:17, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 07:49, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jason M. C., Han
[edit]- File:The Cowboy's Flute - Yuxuan, Lu (Guo Guo).ogg
- File:The Cowherd's Flute, Piano Pupil Xinran, Yu.ogg
- File:Under the Sunshine, Piano Student Yu Zhang.ogg
- File:Under the sunshine - Kim Hui 1st draft.ogg
- File:Pearl of the Orient - Solo-Piano Student Xuan, Li.ogg
- File:Mother in the candlelight - by piano pupil Siqi, Ren (9 Years Old).ogg
- File:Moonlight upon Lotus Pool (Summer) - Piano Pupil Xuan, Li (Only 10-years-old).ogg
- File:Colourful clouds running after moon played by student Xinyi, Hua.ogg
These are all recordings of music which may not be in the public domain:
The Cowboy's (or Cowherd's) Flute was composed by He Luting (died 1999). The Cowboy's Flute appeared on the main page in 2021 and was incorrectly listed as a folk song
Under the Sunshine was composed by Wang Lisan (died 2013)
Pearl of the Orient is a pop song composed by Lo Ta-yu
Mother in the candlelight is a song composed by Gu Jianfen
Moonlight upon Lotus Pool is a pop song originally recorded by the group Phoenix Legend
Colourful clouds running after moon was composed by Wang Jianzhong (died 2016)
Johnj1995 (talk) 05:59, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Materialscientist (talk) 06:42, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Archivo con copyright Soosie. (talk) 03:38, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 09:47, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Archivo con copyright: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGRv8ZBLuW0 Soosie. (talk) 03:39, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 09:47, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Allan Love You (talk · contribs)
[edit]Promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:08, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 13:46, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
not essential, a better version is uploaded 76.66.188.253 14:27, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted by Ronhjones at 22:01, 29 September 2017 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing: Non-free logo (above threshold of originality) --Krdbot 00:32, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
another same uploaded Pastratopi (talk) 16:53, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted by Ronhjones at 22:04, 29 September 2017 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing: Non-free logo (above threshold of originality) --Krdbot 00:32, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
It was deleted the day before yesterday and re-appeared yesterday. 176.239.82.15 06:26, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Guanaco (talk) 06:29, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
another same uploaded Pastratopi (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted by Ronhjones at 22:04, 29 September 2017 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing: Non-free logo (above threshold of originality) --Krdbot 00:32, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Small image size and lack of EXIF make it likely that this is Flickr washing Elisfkc (talk) 23:56, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete: The flickr account photostream shows many flowers, dogs, goats and some children...and this is the only woman in it...and its a Bhutto? It is likely a flickrwash. --Leoboudv (talk) 00:48, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Bigger images elsewhere - here Ronhjones (Talk) 19:52, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Guanaco (talk) 02:49, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like https://i.pinimg.com/236x/14/be/92/14be9245ee3bf8fb026a543d6b5b9491.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:56, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:40, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
[fr] L'image est protégée par des droits d'auteurs - [en] copyvio : http://www.castres-olympique.com/billetterie/plan-du-stade-et-tarifs - Daxipedia - 達克斯百科 (d) 20:33, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: clear copyright violation. --JuTa 03:35, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:32, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; no license, apparent copyvio. --Guanaco (talk) 07:02, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Leonel fabian (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal photos
- File:My momento.jpg
- File:Mi moment.jpg
- File:Inol.jpg
- File:2016 si.jpg
- File:Ir a la meta.jpg
- File:Mi profe y Juan josé.jpg
- File:Listo.jpg
- File:En el Centro de internet.jpg
- File:Pablo Guzman y Leonel.jpg
- File:2014 año.jpg
- File:Año 2014.jpg
- File:Nelson y Leonel.jpg
- File:Waaaoohh.jpg
- File:Compartiendo un poco.jpg
- File:Jajajahhh.jpg
- File:Inolvidable.jpg
- File:Amigos de Leonel.jpg
- File:Dios es bueno.jpg
- File:Pensando!!!.jpg
- File:Dailey y Leonel.jpg
- File:Mi Vida.jpg
- File:Leonel fabian Sabino.jpg
- File:Fabian Leonel.jpg
- File:Leonel f.jpg
- File:Evangelista Leonel fabian.jpg
- File:Leonel fabian.jpg
- File:Leonel fabian 04.jpg
Apocheir (talk) 20:36, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 22:13, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Guildanceforever (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal photos
- File:Adisa Kabiru Kulukulu.jpg
- File:Adisa Kabiru Adeniyi AKA Community Servance.jpg
- File:Adisa Kabiru Adeniyi Kulukulu.jpg
- File:Adisa Kabiru Adeniyi.jpg
Apocheir (talk) 20:44, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 22:14, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Doubtful copyright, image appears on https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/133817763/kosmonauts-what-does-it-mean-to-be-italian Apocheir (talk) 20:47, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 22:15, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Will be uploading a better version of this image. Vyom.Y (talk) 20:49, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: Author requested deletion of page. --Hystrix (talk) 22:17, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Unused personal photo Apocheir (talk) 20:50, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 22:18, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Unused personal image Apocheir (talk) 20:53, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 22:18, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by TheInclusionProject (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal images
Apocheir (talk) 20:53, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 22:19, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rebin Kheder (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal images
Apocheir (talk) 20:54, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 22:22, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of scope: promotional. 4nn1l2 (talk) 20:55, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 22:23, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Unused, doubtful copyright: image also on the web at http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3192727/ Apocheir (talk) 20:56, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 22:24, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Unused personal image Apocheir (talk) 20:57, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 22:24, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Unused personal photos (apart from one in en.wiki sandbox)
- File:Farhan alam .jpg
- File:Farhan alam - pq delhi photography top ten.jpg
- File:Farhan alam - India gate new delhi.jpg
- File:Farhan alam - delhi.jpg
- File:Farhan Alam - CF model at New Delhi INDIA.jpg
- File:Farhan Alam.jpg
- File:Er Farhan Alam.jpg
Apocheir (talk) 21:01, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 22:32, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Spacecowboy14 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, found elsewhere on the web, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Spacecowboy14
- File:Renegade 14.jpg
- File:Luis n boys.jpg
- File:Ren14.jpg
- File:State Fair 1.jpg
- File:Renegade Promo 1.jpg
- File:Renegade shot.jpg
- File:Lcdrums1.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 21:25, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 22:43, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Willianops (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF
Gunnex (talk) 05:10, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:47, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by RHD~frwiki (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own works - Small sizes, no EXIFs - the uploader already uploaded copyright violations
- File:Président Algérien Ali Kafi.jpg
- File:Président Algérien Liamine Zéroual.jpg
- File:Map Algeria.jpg
- File:Oasis d'igli Bechar Algeria.jpg
- File:El Kala Algeria.jpg
- File:Bejaia Algeria 1.jpg
- File:Oran Algeria 1.jpg
- File:Annaba Algeria 1.jpg
- File:برنامج الجزائر لطاقات المتجددة.PNG
- File:Groupe Sonelgaz.PNG
- File:Autoroute Algerie. RHD-NJM 8.jpg
- File:Autoroute Algerie. RHD-NJM 7.jpg
- File:Autoroute Algerie. RHD-NJM 6.jpg
- File:Autoroute Algerie. RHD-NJM 5.jpg
- File:Autoroute Algerie. RHD-NJM 4.jpg
- File:Autoroute Algerie. RHD-NJM 2.jpg
- File:Autoroute Algerie. RHD-NJM 3.jpg
- File:Autoroute Algerie. RHD-NJM 1.JPG
- File:Nature Taksebt, Tizi-Ouzou ALGERIE RHD-NJM.jpg
- File:Barrage de Tichy-haf Bejaia ALGERIE RHD-NJM.jpg
- File:Barrage Bouharoun ALGERIE RHD-NJM.jpg
Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:34, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:46, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:09, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:41, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Personal photo. Out of scope. Castillo blanco (talk) 11:34, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:18, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Unused personal image, probably a photo of a photo, out of COM:SCOPE. — Jeff G. ツ 11:56, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:18, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Small, blurry, unused, should be svg, inappropriate compression. — Jeff G. ツ 12:02, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:19, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Personal pic, OoS. E4024 (talk) 12:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:20, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Pic of a not-notable person, OoS. E4024 (talk) 12:15, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:20, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Personal photo. Out of scope. Castillo blanco (talk) 12:41, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:20, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of scope. Picture tried used in dawp in articles nominated for notability reasons. Pugilist (talk) 12:43, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:20, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Personal photo. Out of scope. Castillo blanco (talk) 12:56, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:21, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused selfie B.Hort (talk) 14:10, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:21, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:18, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:21, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused selfie B.Hort (talk) 14:21, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:22, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of image. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused selfie B.Hort (talk) 14:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by IsmailAZAZ (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.
- File:PARTIE PRATIQUE cover.pdf
- File:GEU-théorie.pdf
- File:Theory.pdf
- File:Remerciments.pdf
- File:Pratique.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:38, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:24, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:43, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:25, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused selfie B.Hort (talk) 14:50, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:25, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused promotional image B.Hort (talk) 14:51, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:26, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused personal image of wikipedia editor B.Hort (talk) 14:52, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:26, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused selfie B.Hort (talk) 14:54, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:26, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by DiegoYahel (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private drawing album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:55, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:27, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused selfie B.Hort (talk) 14:55, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:27, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused selfie B.Hort (talk) 14:55, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:27, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:56, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:27, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused selfie B.Hort (talk) 14:57, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:28, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused selfie B.Hort (talk) 15:13, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:28, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused selfie B.Hort (talk) 15:19, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:29, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of project scope. Small photo without metadata, maybe not own work, but copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 15:28, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:29, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Benjaminfranklin (talk · contribs)
[edit]Promotional content, out of scope. Belongs to page de:AC Nautik, which has been deleted per lack of notability and advertising.
- File:Knoten 3.jpg
- File:AC Nautik Seminar.jpg
- File:AC Nautik Kstenpatent Seminar.jpg
- File:AC Nautik Kstenpatent 1.jpg
Achim (talk) 17:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:30, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Skullking773 (talk · contribs)
[edit]out of com:SCOPE, strange monument of the USA ;-)
Pippobuono (talk) 20:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:32, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of scope: promotional. 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:32, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of scope: promotional 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:40, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:32, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of scope: promotional 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:42, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:32, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of com:scope: promotional 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:46, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:33, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Valdivino Sousa11 (talk · contribs)
[edit]out of scope
Rodrigolopes (talk) 22:45, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:33, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
This file is not Dubdi Monastery, which is 1 mile from Yuksom, Sikkim. It appears to be Katok Monastery, which is in Yuksom, Sikkim. Unfortunately this picture appears on the Dubdi Monastery Wikipedia page, and is incorrect there, too. And it shows on google searches and several other websites, presumably as it was downloaded here. CharmandStrange (talk) 00:24, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Oppose File can be renamed and removed from articles to which it does not apply. It's a good picture and does not require deletion. Rodhullandemu (talk) 01:02, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; use {{Rename}} or {{Fact disputed}} instead. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:35, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
(1) Using Commons for advertising/web hosting purposes (2) No encyclopedic value given that the subject was deleted on Spanish Wikipedia (es:Henpit) as an advertising page seb26 (talk) 00:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:37, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 00:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:37, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Redundant duplicate to File:Bapu_Museum_(12).jpg. Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · mail) 02:16, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no duplicate found. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:39, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Commercial album cover (see e.g. gsearch) tagged as "own work" with no indication it has been released with a free license. — Rhododendrites talk | 02:22, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:40, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Bapu_Museum_(17).jpg Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · mail) 02:23, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: duplicate of File:Bapu Museum (16).jpg. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:41, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Random crop of File:Bapu_Museum_(16).jpg with no encyclopedic value. Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · mail) 02:24, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:42, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Bapu_Museum_(21).jpg Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · mail) 02:25, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:43, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Uploader requested. I have uploaded a new version under File:MUTCD-CA SW59.svg based on proper specs. Fry1989 eh? 02:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:46, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
The file is unstable. I have uploaded a new stable version based on CALTRANS under File:MUTCD-CA SW59.svg. Fry1989 eh? 02:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:46, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
- File:Edit street 1.jpg
- File:Edit street 2.jpg
- File:Screenshot7.jpg
- File:Edit street 3.jpg
- File:Edit street 6.jpg
- File:Edit street 5.jpg
Screen shot of unknown origin, likely a copyrighted app. Train2104 (talk) 02:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, taken from Google Streetview. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:46, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Repetitive duplicate images with no relevance to the title and description. Null encyclopedic value within the scope
- Keep good image, fully categorized Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:22, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep good image, fully categorized Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:22, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- File:Kondalapalli killa 106.jpg
- File:Kondalapalli killa 107.jpg
- File:Kondalapalli killa 108.jpg
- File:Kondalapalli killa 86.jpg
- File:Kondalapalli killa 87.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 51.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 52.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 53.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 54.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 55.jpg
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · mail) 16:52, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Duplicates, uneccessary crops, unit angle rotations, misleading file names with no descripton of the respective below mentioned files, with no encyclopedic value as an independenent file, redundancy. File:Bapu Museum (28).jpg File:Bapu Museum (6).jpg File:Bapu museum.jpg File:Bapu museum01.jpg File:Gandhi hill 04.jpg File:Gandhi hill 16.jpg File:Gandhi hill 19.jpg File:Gandhi hill 28.jpg File:Gandhi hill 35.jpg File:Gandhihill01.jpg File:Kondalapalli killa 96.jpg File:Kondapalli killa 20.jpg File:Kondapalli killa 28.jpg File:Kondapalli killa 33.jpg File:Kondapalli killa 37.jpg File:Kondapalli killa 59.jpg File:Kondapalli killa 67.jpg File:Kondapalli killa 74.jpg The nominated files are redundant of the above mentioned file.
- File:Bapu Museum (27).jpg
- File:Bapu Museum (34).jpg
- File:Bapu Museum (5).jpg
- File:Bapu Museum (7).jpg
- File:Bapu museum 12.jpg
- File:Bapu museum 20.jpg
- File:Bapu museum02.jpg
- File:Bhavani island 30.jpg
- File:Bhavani island 32.jpg
- File:Gandhi hill 05.jpg
- File:Gandhi hill 15.jpg
- File:Gandhi hill 18.jpg
- File:Gandhi hill 24.jpg
- File:Gandhi hill 27.jpg
- File:Gandhi hill 29.jpg
- File:Gandhi hill 36.jpg
- File:Gandhihill02.jpg
- File:Kondalapalli killa 89.jpg
- File:Kondalapalli killa 90.jpg
- File:Kondalapalli killa 91.jpg
- File:Kondalapalli killa 92.jpg
- File:Kondalapalli killa 93.jpg
- File:Kondalapalli killa 97.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 19.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 29.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 35.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 36.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 58.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 66.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 73.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 80.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 81.jpg
- File:Kondapalli killa 82.jpg
Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · mail) 02:52, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, kept 3 as in scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:53, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
In the second batch, many more files kept; they are not (near) duplicates and/or in scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:00, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Mfengq (talk · contribs) made userpage in id.wiki and uploaded a photo about himself, which is used only on the userpage. His other contributions were all vandalism. All his activity in Wikipedia is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 07:46, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:59, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
ACadavedo (talk · contribs) has made nothing in Wikipedia, except userpage and article about himself (speedily deleted) in en.wiki and uploading a photo about himself, which is used only on the userpage. All his activity in Wikipedia is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 07:50, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:59, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Alcidesofficial (talk · contribs) has done nothing in Wikipedia, except 3 userpages (2 of them in es.wiki) and uploading a photo about himself, which is used only on the userpages. All his activity in Wikipedia is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 07:53, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:59, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
- also redirect file:Aldair96.jpg
Aldair96 (talk · contribs) has done nothing in Wikipedia, except userpage in es.wiki and uploading a personal logo, which is used only on the userpage. All his activity in Wikipedia is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 07:55, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Is this really an own work? Magaly has written everything in Spanish but this world map in English Why? E4024 (talk) 08:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:25, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Copyrighted poster from a cultural institution. Trizek from FR 09:00, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:28, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Copyrighted poster from a cultural institution (using a probably non-free photo) Trizek from FR 09:01, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:28, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Copyrighted poster from a cultural institution. Trizek from FR 09:01, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:28, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Bad pic. Uploader uploaded a better version already: File:Bilal hall at uet taxila in pakistan.jpg. E4024 (talk) 09:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: more than adequate quality and different angle than alternative. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:30, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Copyright violation: According to company website, all their content is copyright protected. 87.150.3.79 09:05, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Agree: This is not a free image nor can it be included here under free use. P.g.champion (talk) 10:56, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- In the meantime, I have discovered this page. Should this have been a speedy deletion case? --87.150.3.79 11:22, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- No, this regular discussion page is fine if you want to have a discussion about it, because this logo looks like the kind of logo that is usually kept per Commons:Threshold of originality. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:11, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- In the meantime, I have discovered this page. Should this have been a speedy deletion case? --87.150.3.79 11:22, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Speedy keep no discussion needed, absolutely clear {{PD-Textlogo}}. -- User: Perhelion 16:11, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Just to make sure I understand this correctly... I see you are an administrator. Is this an administrative decision or are you just voicing your opinion? --87.150.3.79 16:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- It's my personal opinion and a direction for an administrative decision. -- User: Perhelion 17:40, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for explaining. A direction then -- not a directive. :-)
- What had surprised me was the peremptory way you said "no discussion needed", as quite obviously there are differing opinions. --87.150.3.79 22:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- It's my personal opinion and a direction for an administrative decision. -- User: Perhelion 17:40, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Just to make sure I understand this correctly... I see you are an administrator. Is this an administrative decision or are you just voicing your opinion? --87.150.3.79 16:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep This really is just text and a very simple shape - nothing original to copyright, well below Commons:Threshold_of_originality#Germany. The web site can claim what they like (and most usually do), it make no difference. Ronhjones (Talk) 18:34, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: obvious {{PD-textlogo}}. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:32, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Doublon avec Saint-Pierre d'Entremont 2.JPG Robin Chubret (talk) 09:11, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: duplicate of File:Saint-Pierre d'Entremont 1.JPG. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:33, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
No evidence of permission Discasto talk 09:23, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- I agree you can delete the file.--Tiputini (talk) 09:39, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:34, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE: manifesto for a forum which does not exist here. — Jeff G. ツ 09:45, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:35, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. All of the uploader's other contributions have been copyvio uploads claiming the work of others as his own, thus he is NOTHERE to improve the project. — Jeff G. ツ 11:38, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: in use at wp:kn; user was fairly active there, so allowed for now. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:38, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Clearly not the uploader's work. It can be found here http://www.unt.se/sport/viktiga-veckor-for-liam-rush-3513372.aspx DaHuzyBru (talk) 12:33, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:39, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Delete Source is indicated as "public domain". That is a license description, not a source. Actual source is ...found somewhere on the web and they have no idea who the author is (see author attribution). Image comes from take your pick of possible sources. We don't know the provenance of this image, nor have any way of verifying its status. As such, it is not compatible with Commons requirements. Hammersoft (talk) 13:20, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete (more than one speedy deletion criteria would have applied, so we shouldn't even have this discussion). No valid public domain reason specified, no source information, license laundering, previous publication without indication of a free license or public domain status... you name it, this upload has got it. Finnusertop (talk) 13:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:41, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused selfie B.Hort (talk) 13:56, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:41, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
mass-upload of panoramio streams of poor quality, 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) 17:52, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:42, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
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) 17:53, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: adequate quality, in scope, no better alternatives in its category. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:44, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
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) 17:53, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: lousy photo-shopped but in scope, no better alternatives in its category. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:45, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
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) 17:53, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: lousy photo-shopped but in scope, no better alternatives in its category. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:45, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
In my opinion the photo is out of project scope due to bad quality. Taivo (talk) 18:02, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:45, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by GermanVargas01 (talk · contribs)
[edit]No evidence of free licenses. Obviously fake authorship and using {{PD-1996}} with no any Guatemala-related license template.
- File:Sandra jovel.jpg
- File:Herbruger.jpg
- File:Adrianvidaurre.png
- File:Mario sandoval.png
- File:Juandegod.png
- File:Luis salazar.png
- File:Espina.png
- File:Angel anibal guevara.png
- File:Jorge carpio.png
- File:Mendez montenegro.png
- File:Mejia victores.png
- File:Luis gonzales.png
- File:Junta militar 1954.png
- File:Arana osorio.png
- File:Guillermo flores avedaño.png
- File:Enrique peralta.png
- File:Romeo Lucas.jpg
- File:Patriciaarzu.jpg
- File:Giammatei.png
- File:Mario Estrada.jpg
- File:Dr Eduardo Suger.jpg
- File:Zury Rios.jpg
- File:Manuel Baldizon.jpg
- File:Manuel Baldizon Mendez.jpg
Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 07:42, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:40, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
unused private image, out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 18:26, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:49, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by HanSolo288 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused logo files, commons is not a webhost
Jon Kolbert (talk) 23:59, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:51, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 07:34, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:51, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Ale Sayed Tohamy (talk · contribs) has done nothing in Wikipedia, except two userpages in ar.wiki and uploading a selfie, which is used only on the userpages. All his activity in Wikipedia is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 07:44, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:51, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:YouTube logos
[edit]Above ToO IMO
Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, complex Logo with no permission. --Wdwd (talk) 11:54, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
unlikely to be own work, small size, no EXIFs. Other uploads almost deleted Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:35, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP. --Wdwd (talk) 11:53, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
No FoP in France. Sémhur (talk) 19:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 11:52, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used respectively uploaded by a user who didn't make real contributions, apart from the creation of the user page. Related ptwiki entry 3x speedy deleted. Per FBMD... grabbed from Facebook. Gunnex (talk) 19:43, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
The photo is attached to the test page being created within Wikipedia. That is, the photo is INSIDE a wikipedia page, this page is a test, which can be launched or not.
Test page: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1rio:Emaitube/Testes
Emaitube --Emaitube (talk) 20:55, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- First edit 25.08.2016, last edit: 17.09.2016 = > 1 year = by a user who didn't make real contributions, apart from the creation of the user page. (Ego)-spam deleted 3x localy + grabbed from Facebook = https://www.facebook.com/AlexHPB = https://scontent.ftxl1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-1/734886_931928893521211_7232674386048639013_n.jpg?oh=3c1a32d3b22ffbcd7a7a68fd3b623fe7&oe=5A53947F = identical
FBMD....Gunnex (talk) 22:10, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: Image fom facebook, no permission. --Wdwd (talk) 11:52, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Delete Multiple other deletion discussions, such as here and here have held that photographic output from the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) is copyrighted, and not available under a free license. If you look at their website, there is a clearly marked copyright statement. If all of the output of KCNA was automatically in the public domain, then there would be no such copyright statement. There is no blanket public domain status for KCNA images. Hammersoft (talk) 20:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 11:50, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Delete Multiple other deletion discussions, such as here and here have held that photographic output from the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) is copyrighted, and not available under a free license. If you look at their website, there is a clearly marked copyright statement. If all of the output of KCNA was automatically in the public domain, then there would be no such copyright statement. There is no blanket public domain status for KCNA images. Hammersoft (talk) 20:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 11:49, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
wrong PD, the author Erich Dolleschal died in 1983 Goesseln (talk) 20:24, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: no permission for artwork. --Wdwd (talk) 11:44, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
This is not the own work. OTRS-permission from auther is needed. see here. Y.haruo (talk) 00:01, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:03, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
The copyright holder of this photograph is PTI. OTRS-permission from Press Trust of India is needed. see here. Y.haruo (talk) 10:50, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I noticed after having submitted a deletion request, the last deletion does not seem to be accomplished.--Y.haruo (talk) 11:14, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm sorry. It was wrong. The newly same name file was uploaded after former file was deleted.--Y.haruo (talk) 11:21, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: No permission. Yann (talk) 16:47, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Derivative work of deleted File:Haryana CM Manohar Lal Khattar meets PM Modi.jpg for copyright violation. Rahul Bott (talk) 21:01, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: deleted on 5 October 2017 by: User:Hystrix. --Wdwd (talk) 11:39, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
The source info says this own work, but the filename suggest this image originates from the press agency ANP.nl Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 21:11, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete - Photo by Kippa (ANP), not free. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 22:40, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 11:37, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Predated by http://web.archive.org/web/20110726060324/http://www.fwhs.flowingwellsschools.org/ ; photo of a paper with marks from cutting and thumbtacking. — Jeff G. ツ 21:52, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep, this image consists only of simple geometric shapes and text. As such, it does not meet the threshold of originality needed for copyright protection and is therefore in the public domain, appropriately tagged {{PD-textlogo}}. JGHowes talk - 22:22, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: per User:JGHowes. --Wdwd (talk) 11:31, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
"Own work" by uploader seems rather unlikely for this 1946 photo. Assuming the uploader was as young as 20 years old when they took this photo (and already a skilled professional photographer), they would now be 91. Not impossible, but well - I think it's not unreasonable to question this. Gestumblindi (talk) 22:32, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: Unknown author and source for the original photo; no permission. --Wdwd (talk) 11:29, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Derivative work of copyrighted art of unknown origin Train2104 (talk) 23:16, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: no pedrmission for shown artwork. --Wdwd (talk) 11:27, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Published by non-author. No permission. Dmitry89 (talk) 23:18, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 11:21, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
False licensing Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- I corrected the permission used--Wkbreaker (talk) 16:10, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: withdrawn. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:44, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
And also these files:
Unused personal images of unknown person, out of project scope 213.87.156.71 04:11, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:37, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:38, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:40, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:39, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:40, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:40, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:40, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:42, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:40, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Due to small size (only 200×150) the photo is in my opinion out of project scope. Metadata is missing, own work is not sure, maybe copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 18:22, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:40, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
No evidence that this is a published image pre-1923, it appears to be a standard photograph and as such may just have been in a personal collection. Only put on web site on May 14, 2010 Ronhjones (Talk) 21:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep This seems to qualify for {{PD-US-unpublished}}, then. Guanaco (talk) 21:46, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: per Guanaco. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:44, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Only simple logos can be in Commons without OTRS-permission. Taivo (talk) 08:38, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: copyright violation. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:41, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
- also file:ProContact Logo.png
Only simple logos can be in Commons without OTRS-permission. Taivo (talk) 09:45, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Uploader is recommended to read this page: Commons:Messages type. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:45, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Logo tagged as "own work" that looks like it would pass the threshold of originality, previously published in many places (example) with in indication it has been released with a compatible license. — Rhododendrites talk | 02:23, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader can follow these instructions to prove s/he is the owner: Commons:Email templates. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:05, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Possibly redundant file to the png version. B dash (talk) 02:54, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:06, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Copyright not provided Artix Kreiger (talk) 03:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Added licensing info Parklife47 (talk) 03:16, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: per Parklife47. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:05, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
This page was created by mistake instead of requesting a username change. Vardhanjp (talk) 09:21, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:07, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Premnandan (talk · contribs)
[edit]All other images by the inexperienced user deleted for copyright violations. These are extremely low-resolution files with no metadata. COM:PRP
Rahul Bott (talk) 10:52, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:09, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Derivative work of deleted File:Narendra Modi in BJP National Executive Meet in Goa.jpg. Rahul Bott (talk) 10:55, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:08, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
File:הרגליים המחרמנות של קטי הכוסית שבא לי ללקק לה אותן לינוק לה אותן ללקק ולינוק לה את העקבים לשפשף עליהן את הזין שלי ולגמור לה עליהן.jpg
[edit]uploaded without appropriate reason Sus111 (talk) 11:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: useless. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:09, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Particolare_della_facciata_della_Chiesa.jpg Gabriele Diana (talk) 11:59, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:10, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
file troppo grande non caricato adeguatamente Gabriele Diana (talk) 07:49, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: bogus upload. Ruthven (msg) 06:14, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
The author named "Sa" has posted a clear close up picture of a senior federal Government of India official at Wikimedia. How did he/she get the picture? Who is the real author and the copyright holder of the picture photo? How did the upholder get hold of a close up photo of the person? I request if the author cannot provide a legitimate copyright certificate or letter then this picture should be promptly deleted as fast as possible for vandalism and degrading copyright laws and policies. Thanks! 116.74.12.126 05:19, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:26, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Derivative work of a deleted Fair use file. Rahul Bott (talk) 13:18, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:11, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:Arvind Kejriwal
[edit]Derivative works of a deleted Fair use file.
Rahul Bott (talk) 13:21, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:11, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
- Restored: {{GODL-India}} Yann (talk) 11:23, 25 July 2018 (UTC)
Official document. Proper license tag should be used if it's in public domain. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: PD-Tanzania. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:12, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Files of User:JustCoSG
[edit]- File:Reception on level 15.jpg
- File:JustCommunity.jpg
- File:120 Robinson Road - Main Breakout Area.jpg
- File:JustCo @ 120 Robinson Road.jpg
- File:120 Robinson Road - Hotdesking Area.jpg
All of them are copyrighted software from the company website. I conducted a Google search. Several results come up. For example
- 2 here
All here
If all have to be kept, then they need permission.
--Artix Kreiger (talk) 03:16, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: already speedy deleted. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:52, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Might be fine, but I think we at least need OTRS. http://www.openworldmag.com/kingdom-saudi-arabia/ has a higher-resolution version of this image, and claims copyright, all rights reserved. Uploader may well be the photographer, but that seems unclear. Jmabel ! talk 03:31, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:53, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:Ushiku Daibutsu
[edit]Per COM:FOP#Japan: 1995 monument.
- File:Buda de Ushiku-sctambled.jpg
- File:Daibutsu.jpg
- File:Ushiku Daibutsu 2006.jpg
- File:Ushiku-daibutsu-reasambledpicture.jpg
- File:UshikuBuddha.jpg
- File:Ushikudaibutsu-ibaraki-japan-daytime-fullimage.jpg
Eleassar (t/p) 09:18, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
★ Halt! Hold Your horses! Ushiku Daibutsu is a building. There are elevators and everything inside. According to the linked COMFOP article, buildings are OK. The nominator might not have known this? Cheers, Nesnad (talk) 13:16, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
- The linked article says that "Some buildings like the Tower of the Sun can be regarded as artistic works" and thus the designer can claim copyright infringement. This building in the shape of the Buddha is certainly comparable to it in the sense that it qualifies as a statue and thus as an artistic work. --Eleassar (t/p) 13:55, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
- Eleassar, as the nominator isn't it on you to provide proof that the building was claimed as copyright? To me a Buddha is like a cross, it isn't thought to be copyrighted. So I'd be quite surprised if you found any claim of copyright on this Buddha. Cheers, Nesnad (talk) 04:15, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
- Statues of Buddha (as well as corpses of Jesus on a cross) are generally regarded as artistic works. Per COM:EVID, the burden of proof that an exception in this regard should be made for this statue is on the uploader. --Eleassar (t/p) 07:43, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: It is sculpture, rather than architecture, despite its size and the fact that people can go into it. The Statue of Liberty is sculpture.... As for the question of whether it cannot have a copyright, like a cross -- a plain cross would probably not pass the ToO anywhere, any Buddha certainly would. The burden of proof that an image (and any underlying work) is free of copyright or freely licensed always lies with those who would keep it. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:21, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Ushiku Daibutsu
[edit]- File:Ushiku Daibutsu --- Censer.JPG
- File:Ushiku Daibutsu 2.jpg
- File:Ushiku Daibutsu in Ushiku City.JPG
- File:Ushiku Daibutsu.jpg
- File:Ushiku-daibutu-hk.jpg
Rodrigolopes (talk) 00:19, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 21:20, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:Ushiku Daibutsu
[edit]No FOP in Japan. --Ralth Galth (talk) 07:14, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, this is a modern statue in Japan, a country where there is no Freedom of Panorama exemption for sculpture. --Storkk (talk) 12:19, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:Ushiku Daibutsu
[edit]- File:Kunocho, Ushiku, Ibaraki Prefecture 300-1288, Japan - panoramio (1).jpg
- File:Kunocho, Ushiku, Ibaraki Prefecture 300-1288, Japan - panoramio (3).jpg
- File:牛久大仏の足元の秋(Autumn at the foot of Ushiku Daibutsu) 25 Oct, 2015 - panoramio.jpg
Qurren (talk) 11:00, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:59, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:Ushiku Daibutsu
[edit]Qurren (talk) 15:27, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yasu (talk) 16:06, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Files in Category:Ushiku Daibutsu
[edit]No FoP in Japan for artistic works.
Yuraily Lic (talk) 13:11, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yasu (talk) 15:22, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Ushiku Daibutsu
[edit]This Daibutsu (large statue of Buddha) ,named "ja:牛久大仏 (en:Ushiku Daibutsu)", was erected in 1992 [2] [3]. No FoP in Japan for statues.
Yuraily Lic (talk) 06:01, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MGA73 (talk) 19:10, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Ushiku Daibutsu
[edit]Qurren (talk) 10:06, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 11:00, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Drawing of Saimata from One-Punch Man. Solomon203 (talk) 12:51, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: derivative work and/or out of scope. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:04, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Photo of a painted portrait. We need confirmation that the uploader is the painter.
Ruthven (msg) 14:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:03, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like https://scontent.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-19/s150x150/12346285_1657896974448522_125481964_a.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:11, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:05, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
This is map of khanates Caucasian and Persian Azerbaican (In history Persian province). This is not Azerbaicani khanates, because Azerbaican was formed in 20 th. 109.252.73.48 01:44, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep First of all, in history the khanates were not a Persian province. Only some of them were in part vassals of Persia. Seondly, there are large number of reliable academic sources that use term "Azerbaijani khanates" for both Northern and Southern khanates. Even during the period of khanates most documents used the term "Azerbaijani khans", including the ruler of Guba khanate, Fathali Khan. But all this discussion about the name of the khanates is not about the image. It was made by Wikimedia user and licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0. --Interfase (talk) 04:32, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep The deletion request is (irani) nationalistic nonsense. The region is historicly known as Azerbaijan and also the khanates are called azerbaijani khanates. Source for this are given in the file description. --Don-kun (talk) 05:10, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Weak delete This file must be renamed. The designation "Azerbaijani khanates", in relation to all khanates, uses only one autor - Tadeusz Swietochowski (whose book is devoted to the history of Azerbaijan in the 20th century). For exemple authoritative Russian historian Anatoly Novoseltsev argued that it is wrong to call the Kuban Khanate "Azerbaijani". Most authors also argue that Khanates of Yerevan and Nakhichevan were located in Eastern Armenia, and not in "Azerbaijan" (etc. ...). More neutral names for this file are - "Khanate of the Caucasus and Iran" or "Persian khanates" (because all khanates were at least de-jure vassals of Persia). --Rs4815 (talk) 08:30, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. If you think that the file name should be renamed please discuss it in the file talk page. The nominator have a history of repeated vandalism regarding to Lezgian flag. -- Geagea (talk) 12:12, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Названиена карте искажает историю. Азербайджан как страна возникла в 1918 году и соотвественно эти ханства ни как не могут быть «азербайджанскими». 109.252.72.220 02:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Keep. Прочитайте комментарии в предыдущей номинации. Тогда были приведены аргументы по поводу того, что термин "Азербайджанские ханства" (Azerbaijani khanates или Azeri khanates) широко используется рядом авторитетных авторов. Даже во время самих ханства их правителей называли "адербейджанскими ханами" в той или иной форме. Даже сам губинский Фатали хан писал Екатерине II (в конце 1782 г.), что весь Азербайджане недоволен поступками царя Ираклия и Ибрагим-хана (заключением в тюрьму гянджинского и ереванского ханов). Он, Фатали-хан, «за должность свою признал, чтобы честь и право адырбайджанских ханов защитить» (О. П. Маркова. Россия, Закавказье и международные отношения в XVIII веке. Наука. Москва, 1966. Стр. 176.). Так, что название никак историю не искажает. В 1918 году появилась Азербайджанская Демократическая Республика. Исторический же регион Азербайджан, как и Азербайджанские ханства были задолго до этого. --Interfase (talk) 05:00, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- Keep The file is in use on many Wikipedias, from az:Azərbaycan xanlıqları to uk:Бакинське ханство. Commons should not delete files for being incorrectly named or otherwise inaccurate, so long as some other project finds them useful. See COM:NPOV and COM:INUSE. --bjh21 (talk) 19:13, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- «Даже во время самих ханства их правителей называли "адербейджанскими ханами"», далеко не всегда, далеко не всеми и далеко не всех ханств Закавказья.
- «Исторический же регион Азербайджан», как находился к югу от Аракса, так и находится по сей день. --Rs4815 (talk) 20:46, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
- «далеко не всегда...». Ключевое слово называли
- «как находился к югу от Аракса». В годы ханств название Азербайджан в той или иной форме распространялось и на территории самих ханств. --Interfase (talk) 13:33, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
- Каких ханств? Кто называл? И где источники? --Rs4815 (talk) 11:54, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
Weak delete My arguments remain the same. Read above. --Rs4815 (talk) 20:46, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
Keep Per above. Azerbaijani nation existed well before the formal proclamation of independence in 1918. Brandmeister (talk) 17:48, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
- Azerbaijani nation began its existence only in 1918. Do not confuse nation and ethnicity. And by the way, that issue has nothing to do with this topic. --Rs4815 (talk) 11:57, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
Нет авторитетного источника. 109.252.23.174 03:44, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Они в статьях Википедии. --85.132.2.106 19:26, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- Rename the file instead of deleting it -- "Azerbaijani Khanates" is clearly not the correct/neutral nomenclature, as evidenced by the massive amount of Western scholars who specialize in the region's history;
Usage of "Persian khanates":
- Ronald G. Suny. "They Can Live in the Desert but Nowhere Else": A History of the Armenian Genocide", (Princeton University Press, 2015), 70; "In 1828 the Russian army took the Persian khanate of Erevan (which nearly a century later would become the capital of independent Armenia) and established a new frontier on the Arax River".
- Rouben Paul Adalian. "Historical Dictionary of Armenia", (Scarecrow Press, 2010), 471; "(...) in the town of Ashtarak in Eastern Armenia during the period of the Persian khanates."
- David Marshall Lang. "The Last Years of the Georgian Monarchy, 1658-1832", (Columbia University Press, 1957), 153; "(...) and to obtain the Persian regent Kerim Khan's recognition of Georgian suzerainty over the Persian khanates north of (...)"
- Alexander Bitis. "Russia and the Eastern Question: Army, Government and Society, 1815-1833", (Oxford University Press, 2006), 223; "(...) Persian khanates north of the Arax."
- S. Frederick Starr. "The legacy of history in Russia and the new states of Eurasia", (M.E. Sharpe, 1994), 259; "(...) to welcome the Russian armies and the annexation of the Persian khanates north of the Araxes River between 1806 and 1828."
- Britannica online, "Azerbaijan", History section (link); "Persian-ruled khanates in Shirvan (Şamaxı), Baku, Ganja (Gäncä), Karabakh, and Yerevan dominated this frontier of Ṣafavid Iran. (...) After a series of wars between the Russian Empire and Iran, the treaties of Golestān (Gulistan; 1813) and Turkmenchay (Torkmānchāy; 1828) established a new border between the empires. Russia acquired Baku, Shirvan, Ganja, Nakhichevan (Naxçıvan), and Yerevan.
Usage of "Iranian Khanates/Iranian province":
- George A. Bournoutian. "The 1819 Russian Survey of the Khanate of Sheki: A Primary Source on the Demography and Economy of an Iranian Province Prior to Its Annexation by Russia", (Mazda Publishers, 2016).
- George A. Bournoutian. "The 1820 Russian Survey of the Khanate of Shirvan: A Primary Source on the Demography and Economy of an Iranian Province prior to its Annexation by Russia", (Gibb Memorial Trust, 2016), pp. xvi-xvii, 6 (amongst many others);
- "Following the conquest of the former Iranian khanates of Baku, Shirvan, Sheki, Karabagh and Talesh, the Russians combined them into (..)"
- "In 1827, Tsar Nicholas I finally replaced Yermolov with General Ivan Paskevich, who roundly defeated the Iranians and forced them, in 1828, to sign the Treaty of Turkmenchay (Torkmanchay), by which the last two remaining Iranian khanates of Yerevan and Nakhichevan, as well as (...)."
- "In 1840, tsarist policy, which favored a more uniform system for the region, consolidated all of South Caucasus into two provinces (...) were made part of the Georgian-Imeretian Province, while the rest of the former Iranian khanates formed the Caspian Province."
- "In the 1930s, a number of Soviet historians, including the prominent Russian Orientalist, Ilya Petrushevskii, were instructed by the Kremlin to accept the totally unsubstantiated notion that the territory of the former Iranian khanates (except Yerevan, which had become Soviet Armenia) was part of an Azerbaijani nation."
- Encyclopædia Iranica. AZERBAIJAN, (1987); "This new entity consisted of the former Iranian Khanates of Arrān, including Karabagh, Baku, Shirvan, Ganja, Talysh (Ṭāleš), Derbent (Darband), Kuba, and Nakhichevan (Naḵjavān), which had been annexed to Russia by the treaties of Golestān (1813) and Torkamānčāy (1828) under the rubric of Eastern Transcaucasia."
- George A. Bournoutian. "The 1829-1832 Russian Surveys of the Khanate of Nakhichevan (Nakhjavan): A Primary Source on the Demography and Economy of an Iranian Province Prior to Its Annexation by Russia", (Mazda Publishers, 2016).
- George A. Bournoutian. "Armenia and Imperial Decline: The Yerevan Province, 1900-1914", (Routledge, 2018), 6; "(...) After establishing Tiflis as its administrative and military headquarters in the region, Russia attacked the Iranian Khanate of Ganja (Ganjeh) and began the First Russo-Iranian War (1804-1813). (...) By 1813, the restraints of these other military engagements were removed, and following a number of defeats, Iran was forced to sign the Gulistan (Golestan) agreement. The treaty, which the Iranians considered to be only an armistice, handed the former Iranian khanates of Ganja, Derbent (Darband), Kuba (Qobbeh), Shirvan, Karabagh (Qarabagh), Sheki (Shakki) and parts of Talysh (Talesh) to Russia (...)"
Usage of "Khanates of the Caucasus":
- Cronin, Stephanie, ed. (2013). Iranian-Russian Encounters: Empires and Revolutions Since 1800. Routledge. p. 53. ISBN 978-0415624336. "The shah's dominions, including the khanates of the Caucasus, included only about 5 to 6 million inhabitants against Russia's 500,000-strong army and estimated 40 million population."
- LouisAragon (talk) 16:18, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
- Comment I think renaming would be a bad idea. This file has been renamed many times in its history, going through the following names:
- File:Azerbaijan khanates all XVIII-XIX.png (upload by Abu Zarr)
- File:Khanates of the Caucasus in the 18th-19th centuries.png (rename requested by LouisAragon, enacted by T Cells)
- File:Azerbaijani khanates in the 18th-19th centuries.png (rename requested by Interfase, enacted by Marcus Cyron)
- File:Khanates of the Caucasus in the 18th-19th centuries.png (rename requested by LouisAragon, enacted by Marcus Cyron)
- File:Azerbaijani khanates in the 18th-19th centuries.png (rename requested by Interfase, enacted by INeverCry)
- There is also a title in the image, and this has changed a lot too:
- Ханства Северного и Южного Азербайджана (Abu Zarr)
- Ханства Закавказья и Ирансого Азербайджана (Rs4815)
- Ханства Северного и Южного Азербайджана (Abu Zarr)
- Ханства Закавказья и Ирансого Азербайджана (Rs4815)
- Азербайджанские ханства (Interfase)
- Ханства Закавказья и Ирансого Азербайджана (Rs4815)
- Азербайджанские ханства (Number Pi)
- Ханства Закавказья и Ирансого Азербайджана (LouisAragon)
- Азербайджанские ханства (Interfase)
- Ханства Закавказья и Ирансого Азербайджана (LouisAragon)
- Азербайджанские ханства (Interfase)
- Ханства Закавказья и Ирансого Азербайджана (Rs4815)
- Азербайджанские ханства (Interfase)
- So this is not just a naming dispute, but a file content dispute, and the way we deal with those on Commons is by hosting both versions and allowing projects to choose whichever they prefer. Since the file's name and content have been stable for two years, I think those who want a different file with a different name should upload the different file under the different name. I don't think there's any technical problem with converting File:Khanates of the Caucasus in the 18th-19th centuries.png from a redirect into a file page. --bjh21 (talk) 23:07, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; discussions about renames should take place on the talk page. — billinghurst sDrewth 14:04, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
It's doubtful that these photos are own work of the uploader.
jdx Re: 13:42, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 08:01, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
unangemessen 2A02:8108:85C0:EEC:A86F:3BDA:E5B:9C27 14:14, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: Kein Löschgrund ersichtlich. --Steinsplitter (talk) 08:01, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CutzGHpW8AAogIi.jpg.
- File:1.2.3.5.5.country shot of girrafe at the park.jpg
- File:Counrtyanimal.jpg
- File:Giraffe a symbol for tanzania.jpg
- File:Uhuru torch.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 08:01, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Tom.rivers as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: I am original author. Member in photo has requested I remove image and I want to comply with their requests. Uploader's request is a valid reason only during first week after uploading, here 3½ weeks have passed. The band en:The Visitors (American punk band) is notable. Discussion is needed. Taivo (talk) 15:04, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- I understand it has been 3.5 weeks however, this is not a critically important photo and I would like to comply with the request of the person in the photo. In addition this was a photo of a photo and the original photo author is not me. I meant to state that I am the original "publisher" of the item onto wikicommons. I am new to wikicommons and apologize for this misunderstanding. Should have used copyvio instead of speedy delete. I have been requested to have it removed. Tom.rivers (talk)
Deleted, by JGHowes on the same day with reason "Uploader requested deletion of a recently uploaded unused file". Taivo (talk) 08:00, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
defamation 2607:FB90:564D:E23D:E85E:2D51:B679:24B2 15:57, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: ?!. --Steinsplitter (talk) 08:03, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sandra Berjaouii (talk · contribs)
[edit]Copyright violation, found elsewhere on the web and unlikely to be own work.
Hystrix (talk) 17:59, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Steinsplitter (talk) 08:03, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Btlamedspa (talk · contribs)
[edit]Copyright violation? Professional photos, when own work missing permission. And also COM:ADVERT for skin care clinic the woodlands.
- File:Medical spa the woodlands tx.jpg
- File:Spa and health club houston tx.jpg
- File:Skin care clinic the woodlands.jpg
- File:Medspa houston.jpg
- File:Healthy and beauty shop the woodlands tx.jpg
Hystrix (talk) 18:52, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 08:04, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Hammer ortiz (talk · contribs)
[edit]Lacks of permissions, I don't think Commons:Authorization to use material from http://www.ferminsolis.com (if the files are deleted, then delete this page too) is a valid permission, the copyright holder have to send the permission to OTRS
- File:El año que vimos nevar.jpg
- File:Dan Laxante.jpg
- File:Dando tumbos.jpg
- File:El hombre del perrito.jpg
- File:Las pelusas de mi ombligo.jpg
- File:No te quiero pero.jpg
- File:De ballenas y pulgas.jpg
- File:Un pie tras otro.jpg
- File:Los días mas largos.jpg
- File:No te quiero.jpg
- File:Otra vida.jpg
- File:Fermin Solis..jpg
Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:07, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 08:04, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. License does not apply. Jcb (talk) 21:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 08:04, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Mass upload without any information. No authorship information, no source, insufficient information to know whether the license would apply.
- File:Traversée de Paris à la -...-Agence Rol btv1b53005252n.jpeg
- File:Traversée de Paris à la -...-Agence Rol btv1b530033670.jpeg
- File:Traversée de Paris à la -...-Agence Rol btv1b53003246b.jpeg
- File:Traversée de Paris à la -...-Agence Rol btv1b53003199c.jpeg
- File:30 8 25 traversée de Paris -à -...-Agence Rol btv1b53153939r.jpeg
- File:30 7 11 traversée de Paris nage -...-Agence Rol btv1b69166640.jpeg
- File:28 8 21 traversée de Paris -à -...-Agence Rol btv1b530670997.jpeg
- File:27-8-22 traversée de Paris -à -...-Agence Rol btv1b53091154k.jpeg
- File:27-8-22 traversée de Paris -à -...-Agence Rol btv1b53091116t.jpeg
- File:24 8 24 Paris traversée à la -...-Agence Rol btv1b531364771.jpeg
Jcb (talk) 21:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 08:04, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Restored: see UDEL. --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:45, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Эстонский народ в ВОВ
[edit]Apparently original uploader has attributed these two images to oneself eventhough these are merely scans from given book not one's own work. So presumably uploader has no right to release given photos into public domain. For first photo copyright might be expired instead, but currently there's no evidence on that. Second photo probably isn't old for copyright to be expired.
--90.191.76.154 09:50, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 12:42, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
відповідно до Закону України про авторські та суміжні права, нема дозволу від авторів мапи Микола Василечко (talk) 12:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: derivative copyvio. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 12:43, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
This image is a derivative of five separate photos, with no indication of where these images came from. Uploader is claiming own work, but the Hull Marina photo can be found uncropped on this website, owned by freelance photographer Lee Beel. There is no evidence the uploader is Lee Beel. There is no permission from Lee Beel. COM:OTRS is required in both instances to: a) confirm Beel's identity; b) confirm permission from this photographer. This compromises the entire image, and casts doubt over the remaining four photos placed in this file, as those do not appear to be on the aforementioned website. ℯxplicit 06:57, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Comment , I said on the talk page of the nominator, that I would based on the edit pattern of the uploader (and the uploaders obvious frustration at their effort getting deleted) at English Wikipedia oppose a DR on this image. However, the noiminator has raised some addditional concerns, namely the existence of a "prior-publication". I've been previously told that OTRS isn't always required for an author directly uploading their efforts, but that it was strongly recommended when, as here, what seemed to be a prior-publication had occcured.
- In good faith would it be reasonable to consider that the uploader and Lee Beel are the same entity? As the nominator points out, there's no outright confirmation of that on the file information page. The Uploaders user page has no indication of a link either sadly.
- This isn't as such an issue about sourcing, it's about verification.
ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:07, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- @ShakespeareFan00: I have found the uncropped picture of The Deep on Flickr, by a completely different photographer (Kev Freer) with a "All rights reserved" license. It incredibly evident now that the uploader is neither of these people. ℯxplicit 07:20, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for the additional information. Is the Flikcr image dated?
- Let's see what other people here think. BTW I'd appreciate it if based on your searches, you left an explanation on my Wikipedia talk page, in answer to the uploader's somewhat frustrated comments in an edit summary. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 07:34, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- @ShakespeareFan00: I have found the uncropped picture of The Deep on Flickr, by a completely different photographer (Kev Freer) with a "All rights reserved" license. It incredibly evident now that the uploader is neither of these people. ℯxplicit 07:20, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete We would need OTRS permission from Kev Freer and Lee Beel and possibly from several others too. The image by Paul Lakin appears to be freely licensed but unattributed. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:30, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- I note in checking that link that panoramio is closing in November, which may break a LOT of links...ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:45, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- User:ShakespeareFan00, it says November last year, not this year. Apparently, it's still possible to access already uploaded images, though. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:42, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:41, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Identifiable people literally "attacking" food. If I were one of them I could sue the uploader for this. (I normally attack food when I'm hungry, but taking a pic and distributing it on the net would be an attack to my standing. :) E4024 (talk) 08:23, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:42, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
uploaded with error framing Pastratopi (talk) 14:31, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: Done. Better version is at File:Miracle Mart logo.jpg. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:45, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
An exhibition picture in which a not notable person is more in the focus than the exhibited works. IMHO this is OoS. E4024 (talk) 15:13, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:46, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Screenshot of website.. Sorry because is it uploaded by me, but I now know how to work on commons. This file is uploaded before one year Zoranzoki21 (talk) 15:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:46, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Redirect unused (except for in bot-generated catalogue pages and in discussion where correct title is also linked); and incorrect BSicon name. Jc86035 (talk) 15:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Sure. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 23:13, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:46, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Image is credited to GSMArena in watermark, does not seem to be related to user Elisfkc (talk) 15:51, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:47, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Looks to be a promotional image released by Apple and then license laundered Elisfkc (talk) 15:52, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:47, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Cut it and use the upper half. Then delete this one so nobody will use it. 176.239.64.78 17:38, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyrighted image, no evidence of permission. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:48, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
bad image and can't upload the correct because of this Mp337212 (talk) 17:45, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:47, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
©2015 Joe del Tufo, Moonloop Photography, LLC 176.239.64.78 18:40, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyrighted image, no evidence of permission. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:48, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Elisfkc as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: |source=https://tineye.com/search/64bf6137037d2790ed3c6f4768025d35c573b2f5/?sort=size&order=desc
Did we once discuss if googles search results are TOO or copyrighted as the text is third party and the logo is on commons. Sanandros (talk) 18:41, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: Screenshot of non-PD website. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:49, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
small size, no EXIFs : unlikely to be own work Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:55, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:49, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission.
could be TOO. Sanandros (talk) 18:47, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: still no license at all. --JuTa 21:34, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Difficult to state that the background image is copyright inelegible
Discasto talk 09:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Tentative Keep. I've been told that the background image is a stock photo available under a free licence. Give me a couple of days to try and dig up the original photo with its licence.--Leptictidium (talk) 09:48, 28 September 2017 (UTC) Delete I've been unable to find the alleged stock photo.--Leptictidium (talk) 14:48, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- Comment "I've been told" does not qualify as an argument for overriding an obvious copyright violation claim :-) --Discasto talk 14:26, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Comment No, but it is a reason for the community to give me a couple of days to try and find out if it truly is a free-licence stock photo. If I haven't found evidence of this by Saturday at 17:08 CET, I will change my own vote to "delete".--Leptictidium (talk) 15:08, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Comment This kind of processes usually takes one week, so waiting for a couple of days or not is not ussually a problem. Best regards --Discasto talk 06:23, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 13:49, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Personal photo. Out of scope. Castillo blanco (talk) 12:08, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
I am fine with it being removed, but it was added as part of the Teahouse Guestbook, at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Guest_book/Archive_21#.E3.83.9E.E3.82.A4.E3.82.AD. There is a part of me that wants it to remain as part of the community record. マイキ (talk) 22:41, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Weak keep it is in use. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:37, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Kept: per Magog the Ogre. Ruthven (msg) 13:50, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Not uploaders own work. Description says Downloaded from Facebook, no copyright show. GeorgHH • talk 18:14, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. --Basvb (talk) 08:44, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Modern Sciences as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: it is not own work or creative commons
VOA works could be accepted on commons. Sanandros (talk) 18:45, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Per Nominator.--Mbazri (talk) 10:57, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Basvb (talk) 08:45, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Agora as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Copyright in metadata
metadata doesen't say anythin if it is all rights reserved or not. Sanandros (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- CC-BY-SA 4.0 permission added, see ticket:2017100210009428. Elly (talk) 07:19, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Kept: otrs permission. --Basvb (talk) 08:42, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Hanhil as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Metadata shows Copyright holder Paoter Gustaaf B.V.
metadata doesen't say anythin if it is all rights reserved or not. Sanandros (talk) 18:51, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- CC-BY-SA 4.0 permission added, see ticket:2017100210009428. Elly (talk) 07:19, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Kept: otrs permission. --Basvb (talk) 08:42, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Hanhil as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Metadata shows Copyright holder Paoter Gustaaf B.V.
metadata doesen't say anythin if it is all rights reserved or not. Sanandros (talk) 18:54, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- if you look well, you see it is a compilation of several images. I'm afraid all of these images are not created by the uploader, making it a compilation of material that violates copyrights. Edoderoo (talk) 19:17, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- CC-BY-SA 4.0 permission added, see ticket:2017100210009428. Elly (talk) 07:19, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Kept: otrs permission. --Basvb (talk) 08:42, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Wrong object. Will upload again with correct references. Jorchr (talk) 19:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader request. --Basvb (talk) 08:45, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
your opinions are ased : as per File:Vidhana Soudha Lighting.jpg et al, 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) 20:02, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Basvb (talk) 08:46, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
your opinions are ased : as per File:Nandi Halebidu.jpg 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) 20:02, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Basvb (talk) 08:46, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
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) 21:10, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Basvb (talk) 08:38, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
I don't know if this illustration is conform with our guidelines. but I'm sure that it is not "own work" Albinfo (talk) 21:44, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Who else made it and where was it copied from? Don’t propose to have something deleted if you have no arguments. Kj1595 (talk) 04:00, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kj1595: Yes, it was you who created this file – but that's not the question. Check Commons:Own work: If you create a file showing a logo, you copy the work of the original creator. But this original creator or the company have the copyright for the logo. And – as you know – you are not allowed to upload copyright protected content to Commons.
- If you copy somebody's work (what you often do), you have to be very careful with the licenses. In many cases, you are not allowed to upload logos to Commons. You can check File:Albanian Airlines logo.svg as an example for a correct re-use of a logo in WP. As this is a simple logo, it is not protected by copyright. Also the fields are used correctly: The source is the source you used to copy the file. The date is the date when the company published (used) the logo for the first time. The original creator is the person that should be mentioned in the author field.
- In this context, I doubt that the license in File:Coca-Cola Bottling Shqipëria logo.svg is correct. None of these cases of Art. 9 is relevant here.
- Difficult legal stuff – it's not fun, I know. But it's also not fun to ignore other people's copyright. --Albinfo (talk) 16:36, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: Logo above TOO. --Basvb (talk) 08:36, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Albinfo: The logo created was not directly copied from another logo but it’s in fact the recreation of an image found in the display wall of the Bunk’art communist history museum. That image was created during Communism, at a time when Albania had no copyright laws. Furthermore, it belongs to the state security institution known as Sigurimi. So the last bit alone falls in line with other state logos commonly accepted here. Kj1595 (talk) 19:03, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Basvb: Why was the logo deleted without explanation? Kj1595 (talk) 19:05, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- In this case, you are right: the logo is probably not copyright protected in accordance with Template:PD-Albania-exempt. It could be reinstated, when you agree to adapt the description.
- Regarding "no copyright in communist time": I never got a reliable answer to this question. But based on my research, also pre-1991 works are protected by the current copyright laws in Albania. --Albinfo (talk) 19:48, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Kj1595: I gave an explanation (although I see now I missed a letter). The logo is above the threshold of originality, it had an own work claim, but I suppose you are not the designer of the original logo? Thus a description on the copyright status of the original logo has to be reflected within source, author and license information. If the arguments under Template:PD-Albania-exempt make the original Public Domain this file could indeed be kept, however that explanation was not provided in the discussion and as such I did not know to look into that. You can indeed request an undeletion, but please provide some clear arguments on why both the original and the derivative are freely licensed and include correct source, author and license information. Basvb (talk) 17:46, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Restored: {{PD-Albania-exempt}}. Yann (talk) 10:12, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
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) 21:50, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: Not that small, quality in line with personal image/region image was taken. Currently there is no real evidence for a deletion, simply suspicions, but not enough IMO. --Basvb (talk) 08:34, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
False licensing Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:57, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: license says 50+ file is however 30 years old. image vs audio discussion is also to be solved. --Basvb (talk) 08:53, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Pas un travail personnel mais une copie d'acte officiel de 1979. Sammyday (talk) 07:16, 28 September 2017 (UTC) C'est une copie personnelle d'un document officiel. Si vous souhaitez donner une autre catégorie à ce document, faites le mais ne le supprimez pas car cela représente un enrichissement historique de la biographie de Jacob Kaplan et représente comme vous l'indiquez un document officiel. --Olivierrk (talk) 20:19, 28 September 2017 (UTC)Olivierrk 28 september 2017
Deleted: Olivierrk, we need the copyrightholder of the passport (state, passphoto) to give permission, this is likely not happening. --Basvb (talk) 08:54, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
A personal file that serves nothing. The uploader has added this and another picture of hers with dogs (but strangely enough not another one where she does not appear with the dogs) into a "taller" (ES: workshop) page, simply to prevent deletion because of "use". (Must have a good mentor. :) The problem is, she has done nothing useful in Commons or WPs; therefore having two personal pictures here is a little bit too much. E4024 (talk) 08:11, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- File:Magaly con sus perros.jpg is the second file I refer to. --E4024 (talk) 08:13, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Comment I've marked the workshop page for deletion. Let's see if the admins decide to keep or not. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:43, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Basvb (talk) 08:56, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
How is this a CC license? The permission page says: "This is subject to the material being reproduced accurately and not being used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context." This is not my understanding of a PD file. Rahul Bott (talk) 08:27, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: "not being used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context." is something which also applies to PD-images, basicly every image. --Basvb (talk) 08:58, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
The source of this photo is not clear, and is still copyrighted until 2035 if this photo was taken in 1965. This is Taiwania Justo speaking (Reception Room) 09:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: No good reasoning on licensing. --Basvb (talk) 08:59, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
It's an old photograph, probably taken before 1944. So it's unlikely that given work is own work by uploader. Copyright might be expired instead, but currently there's no evidence on that. --90.191.76.154 09:25, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: Needs source and author information. --Basvb (talk) 08:59, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
wrong date and probably wrong PD: Viktor Kalabis died in 2006 Goesseln (talk) 09:57, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Basvb (talk) 09:00, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
This file is a backup file when this file was rendered incorrectly. 1233 (talk) 10:47, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Note: I retouched the above to make the referred file visible. --E4024 (talk) 14:47, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: author request. --Basvb (talk) 09:01, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
your opinions are ased : as per File:Vidhana Soudha Lighting.jpg 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) 20:04, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Basvb (talk) 08:47, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
your opinions are ased : as per File:Vidhana Soudha Lighting.jpg 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) 20:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Basvb (talk) 08:47, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
your opinions are ased : as per File:Vidhana Soudha Lighting.jpg 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) 20:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Basvb (talk) 08:47, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
your opinions are ased : as per File:Vidhana Soudha Lighting.jpg 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) 20:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Basvb (talk) 08:47, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
your opinions are ased : as per File:Vidhana Soudha Lighting.jpg 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) 20:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Basvb (talk) 08:48, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
DR started to verify claimed 'own work': small-sized format, personality right isusses, 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) 20:59, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: why would this not be own work? just because files are small they are not automatically copyvios. --Basvb (talk) 08:48, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Not own work. No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. No indication that the author would have died before 1947. Jcb (talk) 21:09, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: improper license + source/author information. --Basvb (talk) 08:49, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Files from narendramodiofficial Flickr stream. Rahul Bott (talk) 10:27, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Basvb (talk) 09:12, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
File:Prime Minister Narendra Modi at launch of Shyama Prasad Mukherji National Rurban Mission (2).jpg
[edit]See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Files from narendramodiofficial Flickr stream. Rahul Bott (talk) 10:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Basvb (talk) 09:12, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
- Restored: {{GODL-India}} Yann (talk) 10:27, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
File:Prime Minister Narendra Modi at launch of Shyama Prasad Mukherji National Rurban Mission (4).jpg
[edit]See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Files from narendramodiofficial Flickr stream. Rahul Bott (talk) 10:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Basvb (talk) 09:12, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
- Restored: {{GODL-India}} Yann (talk) 14:14, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
File:Prime Minister Narendra Modi at launch of Shyama Prasad Mukherji National Rurban Mission.jpg
[edit]See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Files from narendramodiofficial Flickr stream. Rahul Bott (talk) 10:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Basvb (talk) 09:12, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
- Restored: {{GODL-India}} Yann (talk) 14:04, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
The historical photograph uploaded as own modern work by the uploader. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 10:52, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: need source and author information. --Basvb (talk) 09:01, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Derivative work of a set of files deleted because of COM:COPYVIO suspicions. Rahul Bott (talk) 11:36, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Basvb (talk) 09:02, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Michelly330 as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Copyright violation. Needs discussion for a week. Taivo (talk) 14:42, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: Needs some otrs permission. --Basvb (talk) 09:14, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
keine Genehmigung Ulisweb (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Stupid question: Do we need a permission in this case? I mean, does this museum explicitely forbid visitors to take/to publish photographs? Not every museum in German does so, and the subject of the photograph (the vase) could be old enough to be completely out-of-copyright. Or is there another legal problem I am missing? Just asking, --Aristeas (talk) 06:18, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: Per uploaders request within one day of uploader (if uploader is uncomfortable I think deletion within a day is reasonable Aristeas). --Basvb (talk) 09:16, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
keine Genehmigung Ulisweb (talk) 15:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ulisweb: No authorisation from whom? --Ruthven (msg) 13:52, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: On author request, within a day from upload. --Basvb (talk) 09:04, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
keine Genehmigung Ulisweb (talk) 15:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: On author request, within a day from upload. --Basvb (talk) 09:04, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
keine Genehmigung Ulisweb (talk) 15:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: On author request, within a day from upload. --Basvb (talk) 09:04, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
keine Genehmigung Ulisweb (talk) 15:08, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: On author request, within a day from upload. --Basvb (talk) 09:04, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
keine Genehmigung Ulisweb (talk) 15:08, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: On author request, within a day from upload. --Basvb (talk) 09:04, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
keine Genehmigung Ulisweb (talk) 15:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: On author request, within a day from upload. --Basvb (talk) 09:04, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
keine Genehmigung Ulisweb (talk) 15:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: On author request, within a day from upload. --Basvb (talk) 09:04, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
keine Genehmigung Ulisweb (talk) 15:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: On author request, within a day from upload. --Basvb (talk) 09:04, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
There is no evidence that uploader is the same person as Charles Emogor. Evidence of permission from the copyright holder should be sent to our support team. Delete per COM:PRP. Wikicology (talk) 15:42, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: Do you have any reason to doubt the uploader is Charlie? I don't see any reason to suspect this is not own work. --Basvb (talk) 09:07, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
This image of a tamarind tree in an unidentified landscape in India is too blurry and low-res to be useful in any project. There are more than 300 sharp/sharper images of Category:Tamarindus indica on Wikimedia Commons. Takeaway (talk) 15:55, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Basvb (talk) 09:08, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Derivative work Discasto talk 15:57, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Basvb (talk) 09:08, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. No indication that the author would have died before 1947. Jcb (talk) 17:41, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: linked website is not per se the source. 1940s file as pd-70 needs some author information. --Basvb (talk) 09:10, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
DR started to verify claimed 'own work' : rather small-sized format, no location and useful description, 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) 18:09, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: no reason to doubt own work. --Basvb (talk) 09:10, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Copyright must belong to Pedro Peinado. 176.239.64.78 18:38, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: needs permission. --Basvb (talk) 09:11, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
keine Genehmigung Ulisweb (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: on uploaders request within a day. --Basvb (talk) 09:16, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Banknotes. Proper license tag should be used if it's in public domain.
- File:RMB1-5000-1B.gif
- File:RMB1-5000-2A.gif
- File:195110015000YuanO.gif
- File:195111015000YuanO.jpg
- File:195110015000A.jpg
- File:195001205000B.jpg
- File:195001205000A.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:31, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- I correcteded the permission and source used--Wkbreaker (talk) 16:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: everything seems fine after correction. --Y.haruo (talk) 16:36, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Era solo una prova Carmendaprile (talk) 15:24, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, the uploader requested deletion of page: author's request on creation day. --Y.haruo (talk) 16:45, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Si trattava di una prova, la foto è in CC0 ma non è mia. Grazie Luigi Catalani (talk) 15:41, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 22:07, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Claim of publication prior to 1923 is not credible. The automobile in this photograph is a 1940s model at least. WikiDan61 (talk) 16:13, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
License was correct to reflect appropriate claim Amandalinette (talk) 19:05, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: OTRS authorisation needed from the author OTRS authorisation needed from the author. Ruthven (msg) 22:08, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
If this is indeed the photo of the work of a notable artist (as the German WP article claims), please check if this photo can actually be released under a CC license. 87.150.3.79 15:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: OTRS authorisation needed from the author Patrick Timm. Ruthven (msg) 22:27, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
uploaded with error framing, a better version is uploaded Pastratopi (talk) 14:34, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Pastratopi: please link the other version. Basvb (talk) 09:13, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 23:23, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
This cannot be published under a free license without knowing the author and hence neither the current copyright holder. Copyright might be expired instead, e.g. because of anonymous publication more than 70 years ago, but currently there's no evidence on that. 90.191.76.154 09:31, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 13:34, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. Images should be uploaded separately, preferably in SVG.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:34, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- why you want to delete these files?
- here a still unsolved mathematical problem is described which has also scientific and technical relevance.
- I do not see any reason why it should be deleted. I would prefer more a contribution to solve this problem.
- When it is solved then its OK to delete it — Preceding unsigned comment added by IvancicB (talk • contribs) 16:06, September 28, 2017 (UTC)
- Comment one of these files is in use. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:39, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: out of scope because it is used only for personal purpose (solving the problem), and not in a WM project like, e.g. Wikiversity. Ruthven (msg) 09:03, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Cropped from where? There is no supporting metadata, poor resolution and no clear source. COM:PRP Rahul Bott (talk) 20:03, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: claimed own work. Ruthven (msg) 09:04, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by LifetimeWiki as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Low resolution image and doesn't seems like own work even as user has earlier copyright images and blocked as a sock.. The file is ineligible for speedy deletion, because it survived a regular deletion request. But I support deletion, because the uploader is indefinitely blocked as sockpuppet. Taivo (talk) 14:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per above, also very small low res file of person we have multiple much better images of. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:16, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 12:11, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Where does this come from? Doesn't look to be own work. Jcb (talk) 21:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, but it is: logically I've copied an existing 3D view and then I've applied the color effects. --F l a n k e r (talk) 09:55, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- Where did that 'existing 3D view' come from? Jcb (talk) 14:51, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- @F l a n k e r: please respond with a source. Basvb (talk) 08:40, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry, my spare time is limited, so I step here very rarely. I found a source here: [4], is very similar to what I used. I can't find my original PSD, too much time has passed. It's not a great image, I think I can do much better and in SVG. --F l a n k e r (talk) 20:56, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, then the situation is clear: no free license at source --> copyright violation. Jcb (talk) 21:09, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry, but near all of the images here has a source... or I miss something ;). Probably you mean that my image has used a not free picture as a base layer. So let's do this, I will make a new image in SVG, so there are no doubts about it. --F l a n k e r (talk) 11:27, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
- That's indeed the problem. Please read COM:DW. If you make a derivative work of a copyright work, you are infringing the copyright of the original author. Jcb (talk) 15:05, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
- OK, I've uploaded a totally vector version of the image (only exteriors this time), it is modelled from various 3D views and photos (su-17.html for example): File:Sukhoi_R.svg. If the rights to that picture are so problematic, you can replace it with this new one. --F l a n k e r (talk) 09:13, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
- I've added also the cutaway File:Sukhoi R - cut.svg. I think this file can be deleted... --F l a n k e r (talk) 08:45, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- That's indeed the problem. Please read COM:DW. If you make a derivative work of a copyright work, you are infringing the copyright of the original author. Jcb (talk) 15:05, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry, but near all of the images here has a source... or I miss something ;). Probably you mean that my image has used a not free picture as a base layer. So let's do this, I will make a new image in SVG, so there are no doubts about it. --F l a n k e r (talk) 11:27, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, then the situation is clear: no free license at source --> copyright violation. Jcb (talk) 21:09, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry, my spare time is limited, so I step here very rarely. I found a source here: [4], is very similar to what I used. I can't find my original PSD, too much time has passed. It's not a great image, I think I can do much better and in SVG. --F l a n k e r (talk) 20:56, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- @F l a n k e r: please respond with a source. Basvb (talk) 08:40, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per F l a n k e r. Ruthven (msg) 09:05, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Claim of public domain due to publication before 1923 is not credible. Sally Hansen was born in 1908, and would have been not yet 15 by Jan 1, 1923. This is not the picture of a 14-year old girl. WikiDan61 (talk) 16:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Subsequent to this nomination, the uploader changed the license tag to {{PD-heirs}}, indicating that the copyright holder's heirs have released the image to the public domain, but there is insufficient evidence of this claim. WikiDan61 (talk) 17:15, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
License was corrected to reflect appropriate claim Amandalinette (talk) 19:04, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: OTRS authorisation needed from the author's heirs. Ruthven (msg) 22:21, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Claim of publication prior to 1923 is not credible. The image purports to be from the "House of Hollywood", a company formed by Sally Hansen, who was born in 1908. It is unlikely she formed this company prior to the age of 15. WikiDan61 (talk) 17:11, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Subsequent to this nomination, the license tag was changed to {{PD-heirs}}, but there insufficient evidence that the copyright holder's heirs have released the image to the public domain. WikiDan61 (talk) 17:51, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
License was corrected to appropriate claim Amandalinette (talk) 19:06, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- As noted above, the tag {{PD-heirs}} is not an appropriate claim as no proof exists that the heirs to this image's original copyright owner have made such a release. WikiDan61 (talk) 12:41, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sally Hansen at work.jpg. Ruthven (msg) 22:22, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Licensing is claimed as {{PD-heirs}}, but there is insufficient evidence that the copyright owner's heirs have released this image. WikiDan61 (talk) 17:28, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
My company holds a contract with the heir of Sally Hansen (Sumner) granting us permission to release the photographs Amandalinette (talk) 19:08, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Amandalinette: Here we really need a permission from the copyright holders to OTRS. They have to explain if that this was a work for hire, and that they agree in releasing it in the public domain. Thanks --Ruthven (msg) 13:54, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Will a pdf contract signed by both parties suffice? How would I upload it? (Sorry I'm new to the platform) Amandalinette (talk) 17:24, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Amandalinette: You don't have to upload it, because it is kind of private information. You have to send it at the OTRS team; follow the instructions at OTRS. Better to link them this discussion as well. Thank you --Ruthven (msg) 21:09, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sally Hansen at work.jpg. We've waited OTRS too long. Will be undeleted when the ticket from the heirs will be approced. Ruthven (msg) 22:23, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Daniel Dieb (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.
- File:Relatório da primeira parte da bolsa Mídia Ciência.pdf
- File:Jornalismo científico - Prática e revisão de literatura.pdf
- File:Projeto de Pesquisa - Daniel Dieb.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Comment one of these files is in use. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:39, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: in scope, but unclear copyright status, unlikely to be own work. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:48, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like https://australianmuseum.net.au/uploads/images/23875/artist%20mangku%20muriati,%202011_big.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
This image is his own work - Stan works with me at the Australian Museum, which is why the image is also on their site. What do we need to do to prove ownership in order to prevent the deletion of this image? Christy Geromboux 12:07, 29 September 2017 (AEST)
- @Christy Geromboux: please see Commons:OTRS, we'd need explicit permission through OTRS. Basvb (talk) 09:15, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:48, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
I do not want to show my name in meda-data, so please delete it. I will upload this picture without my name. Senkaku Islands (talk) 12:44, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Can you give a link to the new file, otherwise the file possibly cannot be deleted.. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 16:12, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Senkaku Islands just reupload on to of this file, and then ping me for removing the former version. --Ruthven (msg) 13:51, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Kept: I removed the Exif meta-data and suppressed the file content of the previous version. —RP88 (talk) 02:58, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
No source. No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 22:46, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- The image has the text "Sculpture by Joseph Kiselewski; photo by the Architect of the Capitol" and the location of the artwork is cited. Some claims in the nomination are not supported by the evidence. The question probably should revolve around whether works of arts commissioned by the US Congress for the US Congress maintain their copyright. — billinghurst sDrewth 13:21, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
- "photo by the Architect of the Capitol" is rather vague and not supported by any source information. Jcb (talk) 14:29, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
- The other bas-reliefs provide [5] as a source. I would assume the images on that page are public domain. Xcalibur (talk) 11:43, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
- "photo by the Architect of the Capitol" is rather vague and not supported by any source information. Jcb (talk) 14:29, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, same photo as File:Flickr - USCapitol - Suleiman (1494-1566).jpg clearly indicated as PD-US work. --VIGNERON (talk) 19:35, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
This image is from a forum website and there is no license. Leoboudv (talk) 21:17, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep:- As the website does not hold any license, there is a possibility that maybe it's free. This file never has been published except that website. So, I think it should be there. Ominictionary (talk)
Delete Unless a license is clearly stated, we assume there is a copyright claim on it. Elisfkc (talk) 23:48, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep this is probably contemporary Persian art (a good fake if not). Another image from the same page on india-forums is listed elsewhere as anonymously created in 1571.[6] {{PD-art}}. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:58, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
- Magog the Ogre, for that I think it's most comfortable if somebody can date the style (pre-1850). Basvb (talk) 08:51, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - could be centuries old, but unfortunately we don't know. --Jcb (talk) 13:19, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:Coats of arms of local councils in Israel
[edit]- File:Abu Ghosh COA.png
- File:Abu Sinan COA.png
- File:Arara Negev COA.png
- File:Ateret COA.png
- File:Atlit COA.png
- File:Azor COA.png
- File:Beer Yaakov COA.png
- File:Beit Aryeh Ofarim COA.png
- File:Beit Dagan COA.png
- File:Beit EL COA.png
- File:Beit-Jann COA.png
- File:Bnei Ayish COA.png
File:Coat of arms of Daliat el Karmel.pngCoA is based on a photograph and released by the photographer. --Jarekt (talk) 12:51, 16 October 2017 (UTC)File:Coat of arms of Yeruham.pngkept per User:Offnfopt --Jarekt (talk) 16:39, 29 September 2017 (UTC)- File:Daliyat al Karmel 2013 Coat Of Arms.png
- File:Efrat COA.png
- File:Elkana COA.png
- File:Elyakhin COA.png
- File:Even Yehuda COA.png
- File:Gan Yavne COA.png
- File:Ganei Tikva COA.jpg
- File:Gedera COA.png
- File:Givat Zev COA.png
- File:Hazor Haglilit COA.svg
- File:Hurfeish COA.png
- File:Immanuel COA.png
- File:Isfiya COA.png
- File:Jaljulia COA.png
- File:Julis COA.png
- File:Kadima Zoran COA.png
File:Kafr Kara COA.pngkept as an image derived from File:Kuferkara02.jpg --Jarekt (talk) 11:56, 16 October 2017 (UTC)- File:Karnei Shomron COA.png
- File:Katzrin COA.png
- File:Kedumim COA.png
- File:Kfar Kama COA.png
- File:Kfar Shmaryahu COA.png
- File:Kfar Tavor COA.png
- File:Kfar Yona COA.png
- File:Kibbutz Ein-Shemer Logo.gif
File:Kiriat Ekron Symbol, 150210 014.jpgkept. a photograph- File:Kiryat Arba COA.png
File:Kiryat Ekron COA.pngkept as an image derived from File:Kiriat Ekron Symbol, 150210 014.jpg- File:Kiryat Tivon COA.png
- File:Kisra-Sumei COA.png
- File:Kuseife COA.png
- File:Maale Efraim COA.png
- File:Magd Al Kurum COA.png
- File:Mazkeret Batya COA.png
- File:Meitar COA.png
- File:Meitar.gif
- File:Metula COA.png
- File:Mevaseret Zion COA colour.svg
- File:Mevaseret Zion COA.png
File:Mi'ilya COA.pngkept as an image derived from File:Mi'ilya COA.jpg- File:Mitzpe Ramon COA.png
- File:Newe Monosson COA.jpg
- File:Ofra COA.png
- File:Omer COA.png
- File:Oranit COA.png
- File:Pardes Hanna Karkur COA.svg
- File:Pardesiya COA.png
- File:Peqiin COA.png
- File:Ramat Hovav COA.png
- File:Ramat Yishai COA.png
- File:Rechasim COA.png
- File:Rosh Pina COA.png
- File:Savyon COA.png
- File:Segev Shalom COA.png
- File:Shaarey Tikva COA.png
- File:Shlomi COA.png
- File:Shoham COA.png
- File:Tel mond COA.png
- File:Tur'an COA.PNG
- File:Yesud HaMa'ala COA.png
- File:Yirka COA.png
- File:Zichron-Yaakov-Coat-of-Arms.jpg
- File:Zikhron Yaaqov Municipal Emblem New.png
- File:Герб Атерет.jpg
- File:בענה.jpg
- File:סמל המועצה אלפי מנשה.png
-
File:Abu Ghosh COA.png
-
File:Abu Sinan COA.png
-
File:Arara Negev COA.png
-
File:Ateret COA.png
-
File:Atlit COA.png
-
File:Azor COA.png -
File:Beer Yaakov COA.png
-
File:Beit Aryeh Ofarim COA.png
-
File:Beit Dagan COA.png
-
File:Beit EL COA.png
-
File:Beit-Jann COA.png
-
File:Bnei Ayish COA.png
-
File:Daliyat al Karmel 2013 Coat Of Arms.png
-
File:Efrat COA.png
-
File:Elkana COA.png
-
File:Elyakhin COA.png
-
File:Even Yehuda COA.png
-
File:Gan Yavne COA.png
-
File:Ganei Tikva COA.jpg
-
File:Gedera COA.png
-
File:Givat Zev COA.png
-
File:Hazor Haglilit COA.svg
-
File:Hurfeish COA.png
-
File:Immanuel COA.png
-
File:Isfiya COA.png
-
File:Jaljulia COA.png
-
File:Julis COA.png
-
File:Kadima Zoran COA.png
-
File:Karnei Shomron COA.png
-
File:Katzrin COA.png
-
File:Kedumim COA.png
-
File:Kfar Kama COA.png
-
File:Kfar Shmaryahu COA.png
-
File:Kfar Tavor COA.png
-
File:Kfar Yona COA.png
-
File:Kibbutz Ein-Shemer Logo.gif
-
File:Kiriat Ekron Symbol, 150210 014.jpg -
File:Kiryat Arba COA.png
-
File:Kiryat Ekron COA.png -
File:Kiryat Tivon COA.png
-
File:Kisra-Sumei COA.png
-
File:Kuseife COA.png
-
File:Maale Efraim COA.png
-
File:Magd Al Kurum COA.png
-
File:Mazkeret Batya COA.png
-
File:Meitar COA.png
-
File:Meitar.gif
-
File:Metula COA.png
-
File:Mevaseret Zion COA colour.svg
-
File:Mevaseret Zion COA.png
-
File:Mi'ilya COA.png -
File:Mitzpe Ramon COA.png
-
File:Newe Monosson COA.jpg
-
File:Ofra COA.png
-
File:Omer COA.png
-
File:Oranit COA.png
-
File:Pardes Hanna Karkur COA.svg
-
File:Pardesiya COA.png
-
File:Peqiin COA.png
-
File:Ramat Hovav COA.png
-
File:Ramat Yishai COA.png
-
File:Rechasim COA.png
-
File:Rosh Pina COA.png
-
File:Savyon COA.png
-
File:Segev Shalom COA.png
-
File:Shaarey Tikva COA.png
-
File:Shlomi COA.png
-
File:Shoham COA.png -
File:Tel mond COA.png
-
File:Tur'an COA.PNG
-
File:Yesud HaMa'ala COA.png
-
File:Yirka COA.png
-
File:Zichron-Yaakov-Coat-of-Arms.jpg
-
File:Zikhron Yaaqov Municipal Emblem New.png
-
File:Герб Атерет.jpg
-
File:בענה.jpg
-
File:סמל המועצה אלפי מנשה.png
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_-_2017.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_-_2017.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_2017.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_25_Oct,_2015_-_panoramio.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
As discussed here, All the files in this category are released under {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} license, however the original authors are unknown and on the source pages I could not find any information about copyright status of the images. Israel does not have specific laws for Coats or arm as other countries do. I would like to keep those files but the current license is wrong. --Jarekt (talk) 11:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Let me pull one of the images from the pile to try to get some clarification. Say in the instance of the image File:Atlit COA.png. Kippi70 put on the file page:
- "created from a COA situated in public in the community" and "Author original designer unknown; Image prepared by Kippi70"
- So lets assume Kippi70 did take a picture of that COA in a public area, for instance a picture like this one. They then crop the picture, cut out the outline of the COA and do some touch up and upload to commons with the CC license and the FoP notice. Why is it this would not qualify for FoP? - Offnfopt(talk) 12:31, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Adding {{FoP-Israel}} template link for reference. Offnfopt(talk) 13:07, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Before I'm comment, I would like to see comment by User:Clindberg regarding to the argument raised by user Offnfopt above. -- Geagea (talk) 14:17, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Even if a photo is OK due to FoP, showing a work in its public context, that does not give you a right to make a straight copy of a depicted work. Just because a painting is in public and photographed in a FoP country, does not mean that someone can then make copies using that photograph (losing all public context) and sell them in competition with the original. FoP is more a limitation of derivative rights, letting people depict the works in their public context -- it does not really sign away all rights to the original work. So, while the linked photo may or may not have been OK (not really sure the central graphic can be defined as "applied art"), making a copy that way is in the end a straight copy of the original work (there is no expression from the photograph left, and no public context either which is what FoP relies on). The photograph is no longer involved; it's either a copy or derivative of the original. I would actually not be at all surprised if that graphic was made in the exact manner described (or a similar photo of the same poster) -- there is a repair mark in the graphic at the same spot there is a tear in the photographed poster. In that case, that really is a straight copy of the original. I would say the copyright rests on the copyright of that central graphic -- no idea if that is a common symbol, or a very old depiction, or if that exact representation is defined in law and maybe PD-EdictGov, or is a copyrighted work. But the .png seems to copy expression if there was any to begin with -- it is the exact same lines/contours/etc. from the pictured poster. Now, if someone made a new graphic, with original lines etc. and just using the general design of a pictured work as a guide, that may be different. In general, the copyright of a COA is with the specific drawing, not the general design (Commons:Coats of arms). Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:34, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Clindberg thanks for your insight on this. - Offnfopt(talk) 15:28, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Each one of those images is a low-resolution logo which can be usually traced to specific website with help of Google images. For example File:Atlit COA.png probably come from http://www.atlit.org.il/viewpage_mobile.asp?pagesCatID=13008. I see no evidence that it come from any photographs taken outside. FoP templates is not a way to keep coats of arm. I do not know anything about Israeli law but I see only 2 ways for those images to stay:
- Something in Israeli law that clarifies copyrights of Coats of arm or government symbols or work of/for government employees
- Someone contact the jurisdictions which presumably own the copyrights (if files are not in public domain than they are copyrighted) and ask them to release the images and send permissions to COM:OTRS.
- My preference is to keep the files, but only if we find a way to clarify the copyrights. --Jarekt (talk) 18:24, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- With that particular image, trying to assume if it came from another site is not a good case since that image has been uploaded here since 2013, so no telling how many websites may have sourced the image from commons since then. That particular image has been here too long so that type of information isn't reliable unless you were able to find the image in use in the wayback machine prior to the upload date. I looked through some of the uploads and the ones that list a specific site as the source (that were uploaded by Kippi70) I had trouble finding any notice on those sites of a CC license (thought I will note I had to use google translator when browsing the sites, so I can't say how accurate that endeavor was). For those, if a CC license can't be pointed out on the sites in question then those do appear to be a copyright violation unless there is some other law that allows their use.
- Though I also want to note that for instance File:Coat of arms of Yeruham.png, appears that it may actually be Own work. I was able to extract a vector of the official graphic from a document and the official version is different and it appears the above one should be safe to keep. You can see the difference here. Note: I haven't be able to look through all the images, so these findings aren't conclusive of all the images - Offnfopt(talk) 20:24, 28 September 2017 (UTC
- Given the odd notch at the bottom left of the shield, I'd guess it was not copied straight from the graphic you link to, which does not have the notch. However, the difference is moot, since that is the same depiction of the arms, and so the upload (copyright-wise) amounts to a copy of the work you linked (as does the pictured poster), no matter how it was obtained. So, the uploader should not have any rights to license, but would need to find why the original is OK. If the uploader made an original drawing of a basic design, those are probably OK with the existing license. But if these were all copied from government websites, there would have to be another reason they are OK, because they are straight copies. Looking at PD-IsraelGov, the specific depiction would almost have to be part of the law itself (not impossible, but rare). If the law only has the blazon, that's not enough. Otherwise, the depiction would have to be at least 50 years old. Carl Lindberg (talk) 21:12, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Carl Lindberg, Regarding this: "does not mean that someone can then make copies using that photograph (losing all public context) and sell them in competition with the original." @Drork claims: "Added after an edit conflict: Expanding the PD-Israel template is wrong. FOP is not PD. For example, I cannot make multiple reproductions of a sculpture I saw in the street. I can take its picture, draw it, make a sketch of it, broadcast these visual depictions, but I still cannot reproduce it in masses without the artist's permission. That is perhaps the fine line between PD and FOP."
- Regarding your doubt as to whether "applied art" covers coats of arms. "Applied art" is very broad in Israel. See this.
- It is not "very broad". It is broader than the "works of artistic craftsmanship" originally inherited from UK law, but it is short of "artistic work". As your link says, Therefore, an artistic work created for artistic purpose is by no means applied art. A pure COA drawing would be an artistic work for artistic purpose. Something like a subway map, probably applied art. Anyways, the FoP aspect is moot here for most of them, since they are not photographs of a public context, but rather straight graphics. If they were copied from government depictions or websites, the uploader has no right to license them, but would need to find another way the particular depiction is PD or otherwise licensed. Carl Lindberg (talk) 21:02, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- I have had too many conflicting discussions about this and I'm confused. I think everyone agrees copying a file is not ok, but could anyone summarize the bottom line for the remaining cases? Specifically: Is it OK to photograph, proccess and upload coats of arms? Is it OK to recreate an SVG sketch as Kippie did? Is it OK to upload a raw unprocessed photograph? And in each of the cases, which licenses/permission templates should be added to the file. I'm not a lawyer and I just want to upload some COAs if it's permitted. (And prevent the deletion of the existing ones if they're allowed). -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 14:41, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Carl Lindberg I'm no lawyer and I may be talking nonsense, but I've read the (original Hebrew) paragraphs and they seem to make no mention of "public context". Do you have a citation? The law seems almost as plain as the current FoP-Israel description: "Broadcasting, or copying by way of photography, drawing, sketch or similar visual description, of an architectural work, a work of sculpture or work of applied art, are permitted where the aforesaid work is permanently situated in a public place." (paragraph 23)". Now, whether or not a COA is a work of applied art, I don't know.
- "freedom of panorama" is basically a limitation of derivative rights of an author on derivatives of their work. It tries to balance the rights of photographers, filmmakers, etc. who make works in public, from being guilty of copyright infringement by simply including works which are in the area. I guess the idea is that if something like a statue is up in public, the author gets a lot of publicity and renown, but should not have the right to sue anyone who publishes a photo where it appears. However, in no case does such limitation basically grant anyone the right to make straight copies -- even if the process involves a photo which started out being OK as a FoP photo. The question is the end result, no matter the process. If it is a copy in the end, then the full rights of the original apply. The Berne Convention, while allowing clauses such as FoP, also only allows such derivative works "provided that such reproduction does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work". If something amounts to a copy, then it directly competes with the original, and absolutely conflicts with normal use, and should not be something allowed under those clauses. Otherwise, you would be claiming that simply by putting a work up in public, the author loses all rights to the work, as anyone is then allowed to make pure copies and sell them. The clause really is for derivative works which contain them -- i.e. works which add other expression, and do not directly compete with the original.
- Copyright of municipal works can be an aggravating subject, since those rights are so rarely defended. Furthermore, almost all uses except the most commercial would probably fall under fair use (which Israel seems to have imported almost word-for-word from U.S. law), so any use on Wikipedia would almost certainly be legal. However, that does not make them "free" by our definition, so that is not enough to satisfy Commons policy (which is mandated by the WMF). It sounds like Israeli law does make the contents of actual laws free from copyright, as well, but leaves other government works subject to normal copyright. So, if a written design is part of a law or ordnance, the design is fine -- but any particular drawing made to that written design would have its own copyright (they would be separate expressions of the same idea, and it is the expression which has a copyright, not the idea). So, copying a drawing from a government website (via a public photo or straight) would seem to be copying a copyrighted work without permission (other than fair use). We don't allow those. Given Israeli law, if a particular drawing was itself inserted into the law, that may qualify it as being PD -- but usually, it is the written description at most. I'm sure these would qualify for the fair use policies on en-wiki and he-wiki (though I do not know the latter's policies at all), but technically do not comply with Commons policies. And there is no basis for any type of CC license -- a person making copies is not the author, and does not own any rights to license. On the other hand, if someone makes an original drawing of a design, they would own the copyright and could license / upload it. But ones which appear identical (in the small details, exact lines, etc.) of drawings from government websites are likely not OK. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:41, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- Comment I think it would be better to group these images based on the uploader instead of having all the images mixed together. - Offnfopt(talk) 20:41, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep File:Coat of arms of Yeruham.png based on my above comment. Other files need further investigation. - Offnfopt(talk) 20:41, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Done I excluded that one from this DR. --Jarekt (talk) 16:39, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Shouldn't wee add back {{FoP-Israel}} to that file? I think it's allowed to stay because it is a recreation of something permanently situated in public and not of some random piece of art not always placed in public. -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 20:56, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- FoP templates are not relevant and quite confusing, as there is no evidence there someone took any photographs of the sculpture or a mural outside. --Jarekt (talk) 02:44, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- Shouldn't wee add back {{FoP-Israel}} to that file? I think it's allowed to stay because it is a recreation of something permanently situated in public and not of some random piece of art not always placed in public. -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 20:56, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- As I said many times before, FoP-Israel is not just about photographs. If I'm understanding this right, he's allowed to recreate this sketch because the original is permanently situated in a public place. He wouldn't be allowed to recreate everything. -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 09:58, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- "The reproduction of this architectural work, work of sculpture or work of applied art, is covered under the Israeli copyright statute (2007), which states that "Broadcasting, or copying by way of photography, drawing, sketch or similar visual description, of an architectural work, a work of sculpture or work of applied art, are permitted where the aforesaid work is permanently situated in a public place." (paragraph 23)" {{FoP-Israel}}
- SafwatHalaby, I did not included in this DR any photographs of CoAs only icons copied from the websites. If there is a proof that any of the images were drawn by the uploader based on outdoor photograph of CoA, I will exclude it from this DR. --Jarekt (talk) 12:57, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- Keep File:Kafr_Kara_COA.png - Description says "Drawn based on File:Kuferkara02.jpg". In General, I believe all of User:Kippi70's are recreations and not Internet file copies. Recreations are covered by FoP under IL law as explained in my comment and in my "message" section below. -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 20:17, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Done I excluded that one from this DR. --Jarekt (talk) 11:56, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- Keep File:Newe_Monosson_COA.jpg - Released to public domain by original author. -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 20:29, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Comment If original author or copyright holder would like to release the image to be used on Wikipedia, they have to follow the process outlined in COM:OTRS and sent permission to OTRS. Can some Hebrew speaker contact minhelet@monosson.net and ask if the copyright holder was willing to send in such permission? --Jarekt (talk) 12:02, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- Keep File:Zikhron_Yaaqov_Municipal_Emblem_New.png - Reworked version of https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%91%D7%A5:ZikhronYaaqovMunicipalEmblem.png - which is taken from a photograph taken of a "tourist signpost" which qualifies as something permanantly displayed in public. And even if it weren't taken from something permanently situated in public, it is more than 50 years old (1958) hence covered by {{PD-IsraelGov}}. -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 20:50, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Comment File:Zikhron_Yaaqov_Municipal_Emblem_New.png is quite confusing as it is a CC-BY-SA licensed image created by User:Rickjpelleg, however that user never edited or uploaded the file. It is based on https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%91%D7%A5:ZikhronYaaqovMunicipalEmblem.png which is released under {{PD-IsraelGov}}, which seems much more reasonable. CC-BY-SA license seem to be added by User:Kippi70, but I am not sure if he had any communication with User:Rickjpelleg, who requested license change from {{PD-IsraelGov}}. I am also not sure if {{PD-IsraelGov}} covers municipal COAs. --Jarekt (talk) 12:38, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- Keep I changed the license to PD-IsraelGov; hope that's OK. RickP (talk) 09:55, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
- Keep File:Coat_of_arms_of_Daliat_el_Karmel.png. The file itself is own work of McKaby (There's a photograph in the file history) and not grabbed from some random website. The COA was made in 1966 and so {{PD-IsraelGov}} applies.
- Done I excluded that one from this DR. --Jarekt (talk) 12:52, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- Keep on procedural grounds, examine on a case-by-case basis. As far as I can tell, there is no question that Israeli copyright law protects reproductions of public works, and the vast majority of municipalities actually make a point of displaying their coat of arms as a public monument/status/artwork/etc. This is not always easy to prove without physically going there, but we have many images showing this, especially for the larger localities. I believe that we should examine each image on a case-by-case basis as we are indeed doing now (thanks especially to SafwatHalaby), which makes this specific deletion discussion moot. Disclaimer: I had a problem with these images myself at first, and had a discussion with the creator of the SVG versions on Wikipedia—and was under the impression that he checked this stuff on a case-by-case basis as well—so I have another AGF reason to believe that none of the images (by Kippi70) violate Israeli copyright law. —Ynhockey (talk) 12:53, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- Comment. Just for the record, I have full trust on user Kippi70 and if he says that he made the files based on photos he have taken, then I believe him. -- Geagea (talk) 00:38, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- Geagea, I have not seen any statements of Kippi70 claiming that "that he made the files based on photos he have taken". Most files list the source website which has the exact file he uploaded. The only changes to the file is to make the background color see-through. If these were SVG files made by someone who based them on photographs, I would not have filed DR. --Jarekt (talk) 03:32, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
- Comment. Hi there, this is Kippi70. As much as possible i tried to take photos and rework them into a COA, for example this one: file:Kiryat Ekron COA.png. I tried to supply the date in which the symbol was officially adopted as COA by legislation. Just a note on COAs of settlements in Judea and Samaria - i am not sure that those can protect their COAs officially, as this area is de jure not a part of the State of Israel. As far as i know the legislation does not contain a verbal description of the COA ,but rather a graphical one. In some cases i reworked COAs i found here or on the internet. In those cases i assume i have the right to release my rights on the derivative file. I will continue following this page. Best regards --kippi70 (talk) 12:21, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- kippi70, Can you upload the original photographs, and add them to the source fields of the above images, so we can verify that the images here are based on outdoor photographs of CoAs. Otherwise there is no basis to add FOP templates. --Jarekt (talk) 13:04, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- It's me again. I just found a link as an example of how a COA is being protected by Israeli legislation (Yalkut Hapirsumim ילקוט הפרסומים), [7] check on p. 2311. The COA of Abu Gosh is shown there and the text makes this desigh a "protected emblem". Once being in the village i took a photo of the flag and reworked the image, see File:Abu Ghosh COA.png. Regards --kippi70 (talk) 12:48, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- Comment. Deror Avi, an Israeli copyright lawyer, responds as follows (from the village pump page)
- With regards to coats of arms - these are usually set by legislation (חוקים או תקנות) state or municipal. The Israeli Copyright Law specificly states the legislation is not copyrighted see article 6 (translation to English)therefore coats of arms which are usually legislated are not copyrighted (do note that I did not find the specific legislation, and if not found the image should be deleted) - having said that, if someone would take a picture of it permenantly displayed in a public location, the COA within that images is not copyrighted due to Israel's FOP. Deror avi (talk) 10:53, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
I (Safwat) would like to note that photographing or recreating by sketch are treated the same by FoP Israel, so Kippie's recreations are valid too. (Edit: are they? Since they're almost perfect copies). -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 19:17, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- Also, it's not clear from his comment if extracting a "straight copy" from the photograph is still OK. -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 19:19, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- Comment I found a precedence by Drork (the uploader of many of the files) which is completely identical to this case: Commons:Deletion_requests/Image:Raanana_COA.jpg. The relevant parts are these:
A word of clarification: If the file depicting the emblem was downloaded from a copyright protected site, then the file itself maybe subject to copyright. In the case of Tel Aviv and other IL cities' emblems, I reproduced the work and uploaded my own file onto the Commons, in order to make sure that no one, other than I, has rights on the file. Drork (talk) 11:15, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
As far as I know, the Israeli law has special regulations for treating the national flag and emblem. There are no special regulations for other symbols. Therefore, the municipality symbols cannot be said to be in the public domain. However, all of these symbols are publicly displayed in the relevant cities in Israel, and therefore they fall under the Israeli freedom of panorama. According to the Israeli law, a creative work placed permanently in a public place can be treated almost as if it were in the public domain. Drork (talk) 11:02, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
- If I understand the previous cases correctly and assuming IL law was interpreted correctly:
- Photographing a coat of arms, makes it "own work", and uploading the photograph as-is is allowed and protected by FoP.
- Photographing a coat of arms and then processing it as described by User:Offnfopt, makes it "own work", and uploading it is allowed and protected by FoP.
- Recreating a coat of arms by sketching, digitally or non digitally, makes it "own work", and uploading it is allowed and protected by FoP.
- Copying an image from a site is not allowed in any case, because the file itself is copyrighted.
- Also, some files should potentially stay for different reasons:
- Some emblems may be very old. Copyright expiry?
- Some files may have been given explicit permission.
- Some files may qualify for template:PD-IsraelGov: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-IsraelGov
- I am no expert on Israeli law but it is possible that for logos created more then 50 years ago are in public Domain under {{PD-IsraelGov}}. --Jarekt (talk) 16:59, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
SafwatHalaby's message
[edit]This is a short explanation of the situation. I'm just a user who uploaded a new coat of arms (File:Daliyat_al_Karmel_2013_Coat_Of_Arms.png), causing a chain of events that lead to this deletion request. I am not an authority on IL copyright law nor Wikimedia policies. I'm just attempting to shed light on the matter and revive old links that are highly related. FoP law in Israel appears to be more liberal than usual.
Context
[edit]This deletion request was created by User:Jarekt following the discussion here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#People_and_bots_trying_to_delete_my_uploaded_Coats_of_Arms
Please read it for context. The deletion argument is that Israeli FoP law is not enough to qualify Israeli coats of arms for Wikimedia.
It appears Israeli FoP law is broader than others and it is not limited to 3d art / sculptures / buildings, nor is it limited to photography. This caused past controversies. Some of the older disputes touch upon coats of arms, but others are related to other things.
Note I'm not an authority on IL copyright law. I am trying to contact relevant people (see below). The following links may help explaining IL law:
Useful links
[edit]- Canceled deletion proposal of "FoP-Israel". involves coats of arms: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Template:FoP-Israel
- FoP-Israel, explanation #1 (defining "applied art"): https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Israel
- FoP-Israel, explanation #1 by User:Deror_avi:(an IL copyright lawyer) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Freedom_of_Panorama_in_Israel
- A summary as well as a list of many of the previous disputes by User:Nilfanion (not all are directly relevant): https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Nilfanion/Israel
- FoP-Israel, explanation #1 by User:Pieter_Kuiper: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pieter_Kuiper/Freedom_of_Panorama_in_Israel
- Opinion: with all due respect to Pieter, it is evidenced by his comments in this talk page he doesn't understand basic Hebrew and he used auto-translate on copyright law for formulating his opinion.
Locating people experienced with IL law
[edit]I've tried contacting User:Drork and User:Deror_avi. Both of them have made significant Wiki contributions, both are familiar with IL copyright law, and both were involved in previous disputes. User:Deror_avi is a lawyer specializing in copyright and is still active. No reply as of now. User:Drork is no longer active in Wikipedia but I managed to contact him. I'll try getting him involved or ask for his opinion.
-- SafwatHalaby (talk) 18:50, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Comment FOP is clearly very liberal in Israel (but its possible our interpretation is too extreme). However, the purpose of FOP is "making a derivative work (normally a photo) of an artwork displayed in a public place" is OK.
- What you could do is see a physical logo on the side of the building. Per Israeli FOP you could take a photo without a problem. You could then convert that photo back to a simple graphic. The graphic is then your work, and you have a case that it is allowed via FOP. Like Clindberg, I'm dubious as I can't see how a slavish copy of the original could be argued to be a derivative.
- A website is not a public place, as a public place is a physical location. That means we cannot just take an image of the logo directly from a website and say "its ok!". I suspect that many of the images are just ripped from webpages and are therefore copyvios.--Nilfanion (talk) 21:51, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for the info. -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 06:39, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- IL FoP law is not limited to photography. Recreating by sketching appears to be acceptable. Would digitally scanning an official document count as a "recreation"? -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 10:13, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- No. In that case, the original (on a piece of paper) is not on "permanent display in a public place". You could not possibly claim FOP unless its a recreation of something in a permanent location (eg on a sign or the side of a building).--Nilfanion (talk) 11:53, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- IL FoP law is not limited to photography. Recreating by sketching appears to be acceptable. Would digitally scanning an official document count as a "recreation"? -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 10:13, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- Ok. Makes sense. The original "Daliat el-Karmil" file (File:Coat_of_arms_of_Daliat_el_Karmel.png) appears to be a processed photograph of something presumably permanent. See its previous version. Does this mean you agree it's safe from removal? I would like to do the same with the newer coat of arms and I'm making sure we're on the same line. -- SafwatHalaby (talk) 12:20, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, except for a few that have been exclude - copyright situation has remained unclear and this DR has been silent for about 45 days. --Jcb (talk) 11:05, 2 December 2017 (UTC)