Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2018/04/25

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

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

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Archive
Archive April 25th, 2018
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Wiklib14 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

The files seem to be just random images found on the internet. E.g. File:Ο Νίκος Σαμψών.png is a lower resolution of the image found at https://www.gettyimages.com/license/543888294

Ah3kal (Talk) 05:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:40, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

no cumple formatos de visualizacion pertinentes Larrymongui (talk) 12:53, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: nonsense DR. --Jcb (talk) 14:30, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Threshold of originality concern in Grpahic element (left), Wikipedia had this logo as non-free w:GIC business logo.jpg. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:26, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Interaction Timeline isn't mentioned in en.wiki. The logo is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 11:10, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Interaction Timeline is a Wikimedia Foundation Project. The file is referenced on translate wiki and is being used on phabricator. Davidwbarratt (talk) 14:28, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is also being referenced within translatewiki's code repository. Davidwbarratt (talk) 14:32, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


 Kept, importance is clearly shown. Taivo (talk) 18:43, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unattributed, undated non-photographic image taken from defunct personal website. Likely copyright violation. Gamaliel (talk) 17:41, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: withdrawn by nominator. --JuTa 00:44, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Although the location of the signature of the girl is not the same, this is probably from https://www.elementaltotem.com/products/jinny-calendar2018 . The uploader should provide the original source bearing proper licensing. Poem (talk) 18:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Túrelio at 06:54, 26 April 2018 UTC: Copyright violation: https://www.instagram.com/p/BhMmDR4BTQI/ --Krdbot 12:38, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Я хочу загрузить новый файл с таким же названием, но с другим расширением. Engelberthumperdink (talk) 20:31, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader requested. --Sealle (talk) 15:56, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Я хочу загрузить новый файл с таким же названием, но с другим расширением. Engelberthumperdink (talk) 20:31, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader requested. --Sealle (talk) 15:56, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Я хочу загрузить новый файл с таким же названием, но с другим расширением. Engelberthumperdink (talk) 20:31, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader requested. --Sealle (talk) 15:57, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Я хочу загрузить новый файл с таким же названием, но с другим расширением. Engelberthumperdink (talk) 20:32, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader requested. --Sealle (talk) 15:57, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

1981 photograph, probably from police files. It's all over the Russian 'net, but no definite source anywhere. Certainly not 'own work'. Retired electrician (talk) 23:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 15:58, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

The problem is, the file Kiev kkl metro map.svg must be renamed in Kiev otl metro map.svg. This could be done only by the administrator, because the file with same name (this redirect) already exists. So it’s easier to delete this redirection and then rename the file into this name Gzhegozh (talk) 20:54, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Wdwd at 11:46, 26 April 2018 UTC: Temporary deletion for file renaming --Krdbot 18:38, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Incorrectly named. This page has now been replaced by "Category:MOS Burger restaurants in Kaohsiung".--Kai3952 (talk) 19:33, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, no need to keep this redir. --Achim (talk) 12:58, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal files, out of project scope Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:19, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • I’m unsure why this file has been proposed for deletion. It is not a personal file, it is part of a collection of original artworks publicly visible at my website teddym.com - please could you explain in more detail? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teddymstudio (talk • contribs) 08:20, 25 April 2018‎ (UTC)[reply]
  • @Teddymstudio: Hello again Teddy. The reason for which the file has been nominated for deletion is because it doesn't fall within our project scope. Commons is not a webhost, and while your art may be freely-licensed it is not of much use to our projects. What I would suggest to you is to find another service like flickr and use that platform to have a complete collection of your art which may better suit your needs, as your other files are also likely to be uploaded for deletion for the same reason. If you have any other questions don't hesitate to reach out to me either here or my talk page. Regards, Jon Kolbert (talk) 22:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @John Kolbert: Thank you for your explanation. I may be confused. I uploaded photographs of my work to Wikimedia Commons because I had seen and read other artists had done the same. These photographs of my work are not intended for any third party to download and use on a commercial basis hence they are not scalable, I own the copyright and understand such images can be used purely for reference purposes to people writing about related art topics. I have a website to promote my work, I was simply understanding the submission of photographs of hardcopy work by an artist to Wikimedia commons allows for the artist's work to be added to a wider public library. Best Wishes, Teddy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teddymstudio (talk • contribs) 2018-04-26T11:17:58‎ (UTC)
  • {{vk}}, on the account of two reasons:
  1. While Commons should not be a repository for non-notable digital artwork for obvious reasons of scalability, photographic reproductions of hardcopy artwork, even if non-notable as such, can be argued to be in nonetheless in scope.
  2. The depicted Caroline Vreeland is notable: see Google Images and English Wikipedia (3 hits)
-- Tuválkin 00:29, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Tuvalkin: Thank you for your wish to keep the file and explaining the justifications for doing so. I am new to Wikimedia and therefore this is a learning curve for me. Best Wishes, Teddy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teddymstudio (talk • contribs) 2018-04-26T11:17:58‎ (UTC)
  • It does in response to the claim, in the nomination, that this image is off scope. The claim that this image is a COM:DW copyvio was not in the nomination; it is now and needs to be addressed now, right below. -- Tuválkin 20:00, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I actually try to steer well away from any discussion about depictions of Jimbo, and «you know» why. That said, and leaving aside the not irrelevant difference between "famous" and "notable", all I can say is: Yes we do, when there’s only one image (as in the case at hand), or even only a few. -- Tuválkin 01:19, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed; well spotted. @Teddymstudio: please urgently explain the copyright status of the photo this painting was based on. Is it a selfie, as it appears? Was Caroline Vreeland’s (or whichever photographer’s) permission obtained? Can you prove it by means of the precess outlined here? If so, can you upload, for interest, the original photo, too? -- Tuválkin 20:00, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • There appears to be a lack of understanding of my work as a professional artist. The photos I have uploaded are largely photos of my original artworks. In this instance, Caroline Vreeland has seen and likes this artwork but, it is clear to me I have uploaded photos to Wikimedia having misunderstood the whole purpose of the platform. Perhaps someone could just delete my submissions please? It would be far easier don’t you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teddymstudio (talk • contribs) 2018-04-27T20:15:08‎ (UTC)
  • @Teddymstudio: You can accuse the volonteers who curate a repository containing millions of images (many of them “artistic” in one way or another) of «lack of understanding», or you can confess that you «misunderstood the whole purpose of» that same repository — but you can hardly claim both.
Now, as an artist you have the right to do anything you want (and more power to that), but as a professional in a field where copyright issues are important, supposedly to defend the interests of «professional artist»s themselves, you should be aware that a derivative work (such as a painting based on a photo as in the case at hand) incurrs in derivative copyright issues by inheriting/incorporating the copyright status of the original artwork the derivative was derived from. (Pro tip: choose always Public Domain photography for your collage or tracing needs.)
That is the matter here. Wikimedia Commons cannot host, due to copyright concerns, any work which is a derivative of another (regardless of Wikimedia Commons hosting that original work or not) whose copyright status is not either Public Domain or licensed under CC-BY-SA (to make a long story short).
(Please understand that here the terms "work" and "derivative" are used in their copyright law meanings, not in their art critique acceptions.)
-- Tuválkin 01:19, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • To be clear, I am not accusing anyone. You are wrong to accuse me of doing so. I have not broken any copyright laws. As already stated, I have clearly misunderstood the purpose of Wikimedia Commons and confirm I wish for my account to be permanently deleted along with all the files I have uploaded. If you are without the authority to do this, please advise as to who can execute my wish. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teddymstudio (talk • contribs) 2018-04-28 04:28:36‎ (UTC)

Deleted: per nomination; the uploader additionally asked for a deletion of all theor images at my talk page. --Ymblanter (talk) 08:42, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright violation. This incorporates an image of Eric Clapton (used on his 2010 "Clapton" release) which is almost certainly copyrighted. Uploader makes the claim that this is "personally approved by Eric Clapton" so I thought it was worth discussing, rather than a speedy deletion. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 22:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for raising the issue of copyright violation and allowing for a discussion. In creating the artwork in 2013, I worked closely and with the approval of Eric Clapton's manager. He approved the final artwork and told me Eric Clapton personally approved the piece for sale. At the time, I understood the photograph on the cover of the 2010 album was taken by a friend of Eric's and therefore for me to re-appropriate it for use in my own work, I guess under the heading of free-use, was not an issue. The artwork was published on Eric Clapton's official website and in the 5 years since, I have never been approached over a violation of copyright. I hope this provides you with helpful information. Just with regard to the image of the artwork, I understand that by appearing on Wikimedia Commons the image can be used by a third party but, only if I am referenced. It does not afford a right to a third party to download the image for use in any commercial sense? If I am wrong about this, please advise, thank you.

When you uploaded your images you should have read something that said "Remember: By sharing your work on Wikimedia Commons, you grant anyone permission to use, copy, modify, and sell it without notifying you". Does that answer your last question? World's Lamest Critic (talk) 18:32, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as a part of mass deletion of images of the uploader, on their request, part with copyright concenrs. --Ymblanter (talk) 08:43, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Fehler beim Dateinamen "Gotthold" statt "Gottlob" Lipps Universitätsarchiv Zürich (talk) 15:30, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: and redireced. --JuTa 15:57, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

unlikely to be "own work" based on quality and size of image. More likely to be an internet scrape. SpinningSpark 13:38, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 00:40, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Anirudhgupta281998 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal files, out of project scope

Jon Kolbert (talk) 16:14, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 00:37, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused random shot of water, no educational use, out of scope. P 1 9 9   17:18, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 00:36, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal file, out of project scope Jon Kolbert (talk) 17:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 00:38, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal file, out of project scope Jon Kolbert (talk) 17:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 00:34, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self-promotion, out of project scope. No contribs to any wiki project. Achim (talk) 19:50, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 00:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused random shot of water, no educational use, out of scope. P 1 9 9   19:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 00:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused random shot of water, no educational use, out of scope. P 1 9 9   19:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 00:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Resumé; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:00, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 04:09, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Resumé; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:00, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 04:09, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Resumé; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:01, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 04:08, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

No permission – according to Exif data the author is Jens Wiese. jdx Re: 01:21, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 04:10, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal essay; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:48, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal essay; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:48, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Resumé; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:00, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:48, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low quality pornographic image SpanishSnake (talk) 01:17, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:49, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Screenshot of a non-free website. Mys_721tx (talk) 01:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:49, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Screenshot of a non-free website. Mys_721tx (talk) 01:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:49, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

ไม่เหมาะสม 2402:1980:81C1:DC49:0:0:0:1 01:37, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Unsuitable? Why? This file is being used at multiple projects so it's in the project scope of Commons. De728631 (talk) 02:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 06:49, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal file, out of project scope Jon Kolbert (talk) 01:43, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope – cross-wiki promotion and spam. hiàn 02:32, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please also delete
hiàn 02:33, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image is within the scope of the aim of Wikimedia Commons. 185.177.83.98 13:55, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How so? You haven't addressed the blatant cross-wiki promotion and spam issue. hiàn 22:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Bad redirect. All Wiktionaries and Han etym templates are using #ifexist function to display this file, so deleting it won't affect those pages. In contrast, the bad redirect will continuously display the wrong image because our templates highly depend on #ifexist function. Wargaz (talk) 02:33, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:51, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Movie poster Titore (talk) 02:41, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:52, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Dawood Adeel (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal files, out of project scope

Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:06, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:52, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal files, out of project scope Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:53, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Gumgum10 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal files, out of project scope

Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:09, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:54, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Mellycer97 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal files, out of project scope

Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:10, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:55, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Mnsweetgull (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal files, out of project scope

Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:10, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:56, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Rijvan mansuri 92 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal files, out of project scope

Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:11, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:56, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Kingskidd74 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal files, out of project scope

Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:12, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:57, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by VarunMalhotra1 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal files, out of project scope

Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:12, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:57, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal files, out of project scope. Only contribution is to userspace Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:58, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal files, out of project scope Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:58, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal files, out of project scope Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:19, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:59, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

low-resolution meme-ish image and unlikely to be used in encyclopedic pages. -★- PlyrStar93. Message me. 03:26, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 07:00, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

A photo of the uploader considering the username; the metadata has the author as "Thomas Kojcsich" and the copyright holder as "© 2017 VCU University Marketing". Not own work, and a copyrighted photo. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 05:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 07:01, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Book cover, which is the copyrighted property of the publisher unless there is evidence otherwise. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 05:46, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 07:01, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope, unused website logo. Formerly in w:User:Scorewiki/sandbox. —Cryptic (talk) 06:02, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 07:01, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Why is this under a free license? Unless a specific law states so, it seems complex enough to be under a copyright Discasto talk 07:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 07:02, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Restored: as per [1]: {{PD-Coa-Mexico}}. Yann (talk) 05:15, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Victor Gibby (talk · contribs)

[edit]

The arguments provided for the image status do not apply. They're not a coat of arms nor a symbol

Discasto talk 07:16, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, entiende, las plantilla {{PD-textlogo}} hace que se cumpla las imágenes de gráficas ya que son formas y texto que no está bajo derechos de autor.
Y la plantilla {{PD-Coa-Mexico}}, es para los mapas de México que no pueden ESTAR BAJO DERECHOS DE AUTOR.
Y tu te justificaste con 1 solo argumento en imágenes que no tiene sentido. Tendré que verme forzado a tomar acciones en contra, por los múltiples ataques que has hecho a mi persona y borrado de imágenes injustificadas (y por el probable uso inadecuado de un bot)
Victor Gibby (talk) 22:39, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Víctor, I guess you don't fully understand the way licensing works. {{PD-textlogo}} does not make anything to be under a free license. It's the other way around. Only if the image is made of text and/or simple shapes (circles, squares and the like), it can be tagged as PD-textlogo. As far as I understand, you've referring to this image. IMHO, it's far from being made of simple shapes and therefore they're not acceptable here.

{{PD-Coa-Mexico}} is not for "maps". It's for coat of arms, banner, or emblem of Mexico, one of its states, municipalities, or any other political subdivision, or a similar distinctive symbol belonging to an international or "recognized" organization, or NGO, operating in or outside of Mexico. Thus, it's you the one who have to "understand". Of course a map can be under copyright (and it's usually so unless specific legislation states otherwise).

The rest of nonsense in your statement does not deserve an answer. Thank you for your understanding --Discasto talk 15:42, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, lee:

<<...uno de sus estados, municipios y/o cualquier tipo de subdivisión política...simbolo distintivo que pertenece a una ONG internacional...no son elegibles de estar bajo la protección de la ley federal.>>

Un país contiene subdivisión política, estados que la ONG respalda para su uso libre (Entonces si creo un archivo marcando el estado de un país, se viola copyright ya que no hay una legislación ¿sscific?, no creo)
Como puedes leer en Commons:Threshold of originality las formas en el archivo cumplen con sus puntos.
Se permite el uso de las imágenes según su institución (PD: Donde estudio actualmente). En la fuente de procedencia puedes leer:

<<La información contenida en el presente reporte está disponible para ser consultada, utilizada y difundida para fines de investigación, didácticos o de divulgación. Si la utiliza, le solicitamos que haga constar su procedencia...>>

Puntos que se cumplen y cumplían la cantidad masiva de archivos que mandaste a eliminar con anterioridad, por favor, haz saber la contraparte sobre estos puntos SIN repetir los mismos argumentos anteriores, ya que te estoy explicando por que no son válidos.
PD: Puse una queja en el tablón de bibliotecarios en "Problemas con Usuarios", puedes poner tu contraparte si quieres. Y con el único archivo con el que concuerdo es File:Placas Tectónicas que colindan con México.gif ya que un duplicado.
Victor Gibby (talk) 02:52, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 07:03, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Pranoygreat (talk · contribs)

[edit]

web-quality, unlikely to be uploader's own work

Jon Kolbert (talk) 07:12, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 07:04, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

non-official logo? Jon Kolbert (talk) 07:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: COM:DW anyway. --Yann (talk) 07:13, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

non-useful file Jon Kolbert (talk) 07:18, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:06, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Useless with the current amount of information. Out of scope. Castillo blanco (talk) 07:22, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:12, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Watermark suggests it may not be an "own work" as stated. If I'm wrong, sorry. E4024 (talk) 08:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination: http://www.lakii.com/vb/a-7/a-601457/. --Yann (talk) 08:13, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

"FBMD" in metadata, OTRS permission from the copyright holder is needed. Y.haruo (talk) 08:08, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:14, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Is the poster free? E4024 (talk) 08:16, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination: no permission. --Yann (talk) 08:15, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Modern work of art. Requires OTRS. E4024 (talk) 08:17, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:14, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Modern work of art. Requires OTRS. E4024 (talk) 08:18, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:15, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

"FBMD" in metadata, OTRS permission from the copyright holder is needed. Y.haruo (talk) 08:21, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:15, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Source does not indicate that this work is under CC0 license. Copyright for Konstantin Rudakov expires in 2020. --90.191.81.65 09:00, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:19, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

The uploader's username (JuniusHo) of the picture is the similar with the person (Junius Ho) in the picture, so he is not the copyrights holder of the picture, and the photographer of the picture is. This is Taiwania Justo speaking (Reception Room) 09:11, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep The photographer who took this photo on voluntary basis, agreed to give permission for free use. --JuniusHo (talk) 08:20, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@JuniusHo: Please send a permission from the photographer. This is Taiwania Justo speaking (Reception Room) 10:05, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A declaration email was sent to OTRS by the author. Btw, thank you for adding the Keep icon for me. --JuniusHo (talk) 04:16, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Taiwania Justo: Could you double check whether the license/permission sent to OTRS is valid? Ticket #2018042710002282. --Wcam (talk) 11:08, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Wcam: The permission is approved. This is Taiwania Justo speaking (Reception Room) 13:32, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: OTRS permission. --Yann (talk) 08:20, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 16:42, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 04:59, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted screenshot? Taivo (talk) 09:46, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:21, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

This Legal notice states "Except where otherwise stated, reuse of the EUR-Lex data for commercial or non-commercial purposes is authorised provided the source is acknowledged ('© European Union, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/, 1998-2018')." but later on cotinues saying [...] The EUR-Lex logo may not be used without the prior consent of the Publications Office. [...] Triplecaña (talk) 09:54, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion: PD-textlogo. --Yann (talk) 08:21, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

non-free image, taken from http://www.fanphobia.net/profiles/ashfaq-ahmed/ Lugnuts (talk) 10:10, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:23, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not idea of using this image in my user page Perumalism Chat 10:14, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:23, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

already published/copyvio from https://twitter.com/J_M_Jacques/status/870287573243097088 XIIIfromTOKYO (talk) 10:58, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: From FB. --Yann (talk) 08:24, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

uploaded by mistake RK2018 (talk) 10:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:24, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Corrupted duplicate of File:18 DSC 5906.jpg Lacrymocéphale (talk) 11:08, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:24, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope Gbawden (talk) 11:10, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:25, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

seems to be corrupt image with half the image missing Ringerfan23 (talk) 11:25, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:26, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not own work, found at https://newatlas.com/canon-wonder-camera-concept/15591/ Gbawden (talk) 11:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:26, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work. Small size, no metadata. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 11:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:27, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 11:44, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:28, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused personal photo, sole upload Pibwl (talk) 11:58, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:28, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looks like a personal thing. E4024 (talk) 12:05, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Used in user page. --Yann (talk) 08:29, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of scope, blocked on DE Nolispanmo 12:18, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:29, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

I don't know if this logo is in scope but certainly too complex to accept as own work. E4024 (talk) 12:23, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:30, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

I understand the logo is in scope but certainly too complex to accept as own work. E4024 (talk) 12:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:30, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Taken from an "all rights reserved" internet site. E4024 (talk) 12:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:30, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

bad quality, no encyclopedic worth Hugo.arg (talk) 13:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: OK, geolocated. --Yann (talk) 08:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

bad quality, no encyclopedic worth Hugo.arg (talk) 13:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be "own work" based on quality and size of image. More likely an internet scrape SpinningSpark 13:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

bad quality, no encyclopedic worth Hugo.arg (talk) 13:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:33, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

bad quality, no encyclopedic worth Hugo.arg (talk) 13:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:33, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

bad quality, no encyclopedic worth Hugo.arg (talk) 13:37, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:33, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

unlikely to be "own work" based on quality and size of image. More likely to be an internet scrape. SpinningSpark 13:37, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:34, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

I don't know if this unused logo is in scope, but certainly it is above ToO to accept "own work". If deleted, also delete its tailor-made cat please. E4024 (talk) 13:45, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:34, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

very similar to File:Hey. .jpg, poorly written resume Yangfl (talk) 14:03, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:34, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Single-item gallery. E4024 (talk) 14:16, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:35, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looks out of scope, like some other files in the same uncategorized category (Igers Cleveland). E4024 (talk) 14:22, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:36, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of COM:SCOPE: a file with questionable educational value. Mys_721tx (talk) 14:32, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:35, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial flag of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:36, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused chart of questionable notability. Should be in MediaWiki graph or SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:36, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:21, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:37, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:37, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:37, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

incomplete upload Antoniovescio (talk) 15:26, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:37, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

this is an old logo, it keeps appearing in search which is not accurate. 98.100.255.162 15:30, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 08:37, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is an old logo that keeps reappearing in search. I recommend we keep the current logo only. 98.100.255.162 16:31, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep – just like the last time you nominated this file, it is in use and therefore automatically within scope. Given that a similar nomination from the same IP was closed less than a week ago and nothing seems to have changed since then, I suggest that this discussion be speedily closed. —Granger (talk  · contribs) 17:49, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: in use. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:16, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:31, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:38, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Rap Lubaz News (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.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:32, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:38, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:38, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

presumed not free (see other contributions of the same user) Tiraden (talk) 16:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:39, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

porque era una broma Adanarmada93 (talk) 17:26, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope. --Yann (talk) 08:39, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

accidental upload MB-one (talk) 20:21, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:46, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

I have uploaded new better resloution file. Saqibhassan95 (talk) 20:32, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:45, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

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) 21:03, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: No copy found. --Yann (talk) 08:45, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

False date, found as early as 2014 at https://www.tarafdari.com/sites/default/files/users/user9742/02231074bdf321bd372681691fa24344815d14285fe84956d359326f36baee29.jpg Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:41, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted board game art. Retired electrician (talk) 22:49, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:41, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted 'artistic' logo. Retired electrician (talk) 23:15, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:42, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

image is dark, blurry, and out of scope SecretName101 (talk) 18:04, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 09:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

@Leoboudv: © 2010-2015 Official website of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan. All rights reserved. Sealle (talk) 18:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: Sorry Sealle I thought there was a free license in this template here:

{{President.az}} Is it a false template? --Leoboudv (talk) 18:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 09:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Nominated for deletion on the grounds of quality.. There being a better version in the same category. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. You need to get the original images from Google Books, not the highly compressed versions from the DjVu. --Yann (talk) 09:30, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Images nominated for deletion on quality grounds, as these have many defects compared to the duplicate versions already in the category...

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:30, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. You need to get the original images from Google Books, not the highly compressed versions from the DjVu. --Yann (talk) 09:29, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Source site www.parkschool.net is published under license © The Park School 2018. Copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 18:56, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Taivo! I got permission from the site owner to publish it here. How do I reflect that on the file? Myriad Pro (talk) 22:31, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please open COM:OTRS page and look, what kind of e-mail should be sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Permission must come from copyright holder, that means usually from photographer, not from owner of photo. Taivo (talk) 08:28, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Taivo— I got their permission to upload at Creative Commons. Can I just upload it again with that license? Or would it be easier to have them email you all? I want to make sure I’m complying with wikipedias guidelines. Myriad Pro (talk) 20:05, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Myriad Pro: No – please send the OTRS-permission and after processing the permission the file can be restored. Taivo (talk) 20:08, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 09:27, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

your opinions are asked : one upload of a 25 April 2018 batch, claimed Source "I have been authorised by Thiru. R. Raghunatha Reddy to post his achievements in South Indian Film Industry from 1964 to till date." ORTS-action required or are there any copyright and personality right issues ?? Roland zh (talk) 19:05, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

there are no copyright issues. R. Raghunatha Reddy needs his achievements to be posted in Wiki. I just uploaded it as per the Wiki Norms.


Deleted: per nomination, also out of scope. --Yann (talk) 09:27, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

your opinions are asked : upload missing EXIF data to verify origin and claimed 'own work', hence, potentially non-free content ?  Comment file not in use at Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 19:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: No copy found. --Yann (talk) 09:26, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

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) 19:21, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: No copy found. --Yann (talk) 09:25, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

affected File:View of sea at mahabalipuram2.jpg and File:View of sea at mahabalipuram3.jpg : unused personal file, hence, out of scope Wikimedia Commons ? Roland zh (talk) 19:23, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Could be useful. --Yann (talk) 08:52, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

affected File:View of sea at mahabalipuram2.jpg and File:View of sea at mahabalipuram3.jpg : unused personal file, hence, out of scope Wikimedia Commons ? Roland zh (talk) 19:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:52, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ce fichier est le poster officiel de l'édition 2012 du pèlerinage de Chartres. Voir la page sur archive.org : https://web.archive.org/web/20120527220056/http://www.nd-chretiente.com/ Il semble peu probable que ce fichier soit « travail personnel »/own work. Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 19:37, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:51, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by LeilaGva (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Dubious licensing: © 2010-2015 Official website of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan. All rights reserved.

Sealle (talk) 18:54, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 09:44, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Kuber giri Media person (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal files, out of project scope

Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:08, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:23, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Oluzingh (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal files, out of project scope

Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:11, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:23, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Oluzingh (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal photos, out of scope

Gbawden (talk) 10:45, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:45, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Brenda oficial (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal files, out of project scope

Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:15, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:24, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal photo. Out of project scope‎. ~Moheen (keep talking) 04:01, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:52, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low quality. Out of scope. Castillo blanco (talk) 08:18, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:53, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

it's messy 182.253.163.43 08:22, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:53, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Joelstein (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal photos, out of scope

Gbawden (talk) 11:08, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:53, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Kksivashankar (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:42, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:53, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Kksivashankar (talk · contribs)

[edit]

No indication of user's own work.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:33, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --1989 (talk) 04:31, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:54, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

No indication of own work on these photos, logos, maps or images. Rather small, brightly colored, look like tourism uploads, or a WikiLoves gallery. Most are smaller than Facebook.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:53, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --1989 (talk) 23:38, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

{{BadJPG}} and various uneven coloring (constructed as a composite from mulitple sources?). Unused, and Category:Organic peroxides has at least two high quality alternatives. DMacks (talk) 20:50, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Ed (Edgar181) 13:03, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope. Castillo blanco (talk) 05:09, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: I couldn't find any superior alternative image. --Guanaco (talk) 17:53, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Found everywhere such as https://twitter.com/molly_madd/status/974280220130684929 Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:37, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 17:54, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

I am the photographer&uploader.
I have been re-visiting and re-searching for this however, since I could not confirm the death year of the sculptor clearly, (and most likely it seems, is sculptured at least within this 50-70 years, ) please delete this for No-FoP Japan
to avoid further possible copyright-violation.
(for one usage outside already on a personal blog,
I could let the blog use this shot personally as just a photographer
, with no guaranteeing on that sculptor's part.)
this shot is not De_minimis, and is not in use on wiki-projects.
Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Tokorokoko (talk) 01:30, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:48, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]


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

not a free or CC-licence file, photo by AFP. Danyele (talk) 21:34, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: clear copyvio. --Guanaco (talk) 20:21, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Found everywhere such as https://i.pinimg.com/originals/06/71/f0/0671f06adb53e27f77a89fbceec0bae4.jpg Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Sealle at 17:55, 2 Mai 2018 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing - --Krdbot 00:29, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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


There is no FOP in the UAE, and thence these images can't be hosted on Commons.

russavia (talk) 06:43, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

First of all, thanks for reviewing some articles on wikimedia. To be honest, I have not understood yet the problem with some of my pictures and I haven't got any further explanation on your words (I could see something on the "FOP" link you left)

I guess you mean that there are some policies related to the buildings on UAE that my images don't follow.

I can say that I took some pictures in there and I have't asked anyone on the UAE if he/she mind about using images of his country.

I didn't know I was breaking some rules (I just wanted to contribute with some of my pictures) but in that case, I hardly believe that all of the pictures of the UAE shown on Commons are following that directives

So, if it is possible, I just want to know what's the difference between my pictures and "almost every other" picture of UAE shown on wikicommons

Thanks for your help,

--KeDaO (talk) 23:01, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • @KeDaO: hello and thanks for your contributions. The answer to your question is COM:De minimis. If no single or prominent building is the chief subject of an image (e.g. a general skyline or cityscape view), it is thus acceptable as "de minimis".
For the FOP, unfortunately the UAE copyright law does not allow free, unrestricted commercial exploitations of images of modern buildings (Burj Khalifa and Burj al Arab included), without authorization from the copyright holder of the said architectural works. Usually the copyright holders are the architects or architectural firms who created/designed the appearances of the buildings (e.g. Adrian Smith for the Burj Khalifa and Tony Wright for the Burj al Arab). Per COM:FOP UAE, which is supported by the current copyright law of UAE, there is no sufficient and Commons-acceptable FOP from UAE. A very restricted provision only states that free uses of images of architecture are only allowed in broadcasting programmes (no mention of free uses of photographs). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 06:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted. MBisanz talk 18:37, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP in the UAE

russavia (talk) 16:20, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry (talk) 00:36, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

No COM:FOP in the UAE.

russavia (talk) 19:04, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My comments to the Deletion request of Burj Khalifa March 2013.jpg.
I took the above picture and published it on Commons not being aware of the COM:FOP concept. To get a better understanding what this, and how it is applied in UAE I tried to follow the Commons discussion referred to in the deletion request message. I only to ended up in an endless discussion that seem to conclude that it is not clear that it is allowed to publish picture of architectural work (e.g. buildings) in UAE and consequently these picture should be removed since it could be a violation to the law. The problem I have is why then is not all pictures of buildings in UAE removed from Commons, why only some? Why should the picture I took be deleted while other pictures of the same building are still on Commons since many years and there is no request to remove them? In most countries (including UAE) it is clearly indicated by signs at the place or building when photography is not allowed, and consequently they cannot be published, These signs do exists is shopping malls, airports, harbors, religious places, etc but no such signs does exist for Burj Khalifa. I understand the clear distinction between taking a picture and publish the same, but wouldn't the two go hand in hand for public places? Not to mention the thousands of pictures on Internet already published of the Burj Khalifa.
I simply like to understand what pictures I take that I can publish and which I cannot, so that I do not make the same mistake again. Can someone clarify?/Losttraveller (talk) 03:37, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First, please understand the difference between a copyright problem (which this is) and a prohibition against taking pictures for some reason -- military installations, art inside museums, etc. Our concern is copyright. We are not concerned with other restrictions -- while the photographer may get in trouble for taking a picture in violation of the posted signs, that is not a Commons problem. The problem here is that the architect of Burj Khalifa owns the copyright. While it is perfectly legal to take a picture for your own use, such a picture may not be used in ways which would infringe on the copyright, including use on Commons. There is no real relationship between the two types of restrictions.
Second, some pictures of buildings are OK -- usually because the building is old enough so that the copyright has expired, but in some cases because the architect has given a license.
Third, please understand that Commons is not perfect. We have more than 18 million images here. It would not surprise me if 1% of those -- 180,000 -- were problems for one reason or another. So, the fact that there may be other images that should also be deleted is a problem, but it does not affect the question of whether these images should be deleted. If you see other images that are similar, please nominate them for deletion by clicking on the link in the left column of the image page. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:12, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
First, please believe me that I do understand the differences in copyrights that you describe above, likewise do I understand the rest you explain. Although I still do not have the answer to my question: when can I publish a picture of a building in UAE? Is there any way for me to know which buildings in UAE that have copyrights or when that copyright has expired? There is appr 45 pictures of Burj Khalifa in Commons, four of them has now been tagged for removal. Why only these four and not all 45? Logically if these four violates the rules, so must all 45, or...?
Please understand that I have never objected to have the pictures deleted, I just like to understand when a picture violates the rules and when not../Losttraveller (talk) 19:51, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted, I do not know, why the other photos in this category were not presented for deletion, but most of them (and maybe all) should be deleted. Taivo (talk) 13:22, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP in the UAE

russavia (talk) 10:37, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Ymblanter (talk) 10:52, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

No COM:FOP in the UAE for buildings.

russavia (talk) 06:09, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


, Ymblanter (talk) 17:59, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted building exteriors and interiors. No Freedom of Panorama in UAE.

Themightyquill (talk) 07:36, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Burj Khalifa and Dubai Metro perfect timing.JPG and Tallest tower vs. the palm trees (5373615733).jpg could be de minimis. I'm not a judge, where is the border between permissibility and copyright violation? --Ras67 (talk) 21:47, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted four, kept two per DM. --Krd 16:18, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted building in UAE which has no freedom of panorama.

Themightyquill (talk) 18:40, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination --Krd 11:07, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates! None of this buildings are free to photograph!

Ras67 (talk) 19:48, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:36, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Building under copyright, no Freedom of Panorama.

Themightyquill (talk) 13:22, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I cropped File:Roger burj dubai promo (web).JPG to comply with the rules. ~nmaia d 14:03, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say it should be cropped more and the name should be changed. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:43, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Sealle (talk) 13:15, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Can we have some clarification as to why these illustrations of a copyrighted building are okay for commons? I don't know how the rules apply here. The copyrighted architecture of the buildings is clearly depicted, but maybe there's some exception I don't understand.

Themightyquill (talk) 15:52, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete: as a derivative of a copyrighted deisgn, it still constitutes copyright violation. --HyperGaruda (talk) 18:05, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete: Per previous argument. I only wonder what does it mean copyrighted architecture of the buildings is clearly depicted (especially this clearly as well as copyrighted architecture)? How is threshold of originality actually measured here (for music piece of arts there are some rules, e.g. number of same tones or something, although even here it is relative and some rules say it is e.g. 70% some 80%)? Is it here about pixels being mostly on the same place as in original building blueprints or something else, and again – how is this measured? If one (re)moves one pixel how is exactly new piece of art considered same as or derivative of the original one? --Obsuser (talk) 20:26, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info On this deletion request the SVG from copyrighted photos was not seen as copyright violation. --Ras67 (talk) 00:14, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Ras67: that discussion involved two copyrights: the copyright on the egg itself and the copyright on a photo (derivative) of said egg. Since the egg's author died in 1920 (>70 years), those copyright restrictions have expired. If the uploader of File:Third imperial Fabergé egg.svg based the file on the egg itself, there is no copyright infringement. If the uploader based the file on a copyrighted photograph, that would indeed be copyvio. However, the uploader argues that they did not use any copyrighted picture in particular. In the case of the Burj Khalifa diagrams, the building's author--Adrian Smith--is still alive, which means that not even the original is in the public domain. Any derivative, even derivatives of derivatives, will have to deal with copyright restrictions until 70 years afther Smith's death. --HyperGaruda (talk) 05:32, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  'Keep You can't be serious! I know photos are prohibited, but a drawing? Besides, it's not even a static drawing; it's a series of simplified floor plans translated, scaled and rotated together to give the impression of a 3D object. '⎆ 09:02, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
@Cmglee: I'm very much open to arguments in favour of keeping since these images are in use, but I'm not sure I understand your points. Why would photographs be prohibited, but not a drawing? If a 2D image of a 3D object is copyrighted, why wouldn't an image that gives a 3D impression of a 3D object be prohibited? Thanks - Themightyquill (talk) 11:36, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Themightyquill. To me, it seems obvious that a photograph is the result of an opto-electronic process: light from the building is captured by the camera and converted via electronics and computing to become an image. Sure there is artistic judgement involved, but the information in the photo is derived directly from the environment.
For my drawing, I composed hundreds of shapes which to my eye resemble the floor plans, then arranged them to make a representation of the building. (I admit that tracing a photo, for example, is a grey area, but this is not in my case.)
Look carefully at my illustration: Is the real building just a collection of planes floating in space? Do these "floors" have colours like mine?
I think that considering a non-grey-area drawing as a violation of FOP is a dangerous slippery slope; where does one draw the line? For example, if I claim that this: /\ is a drawing of Burj Khalifa, does that violate FOP?
Cheers, '⎆ 21:55, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Sure, /\ is not a violation of copyright (no FoP to speak of here) but wouldn't a super accurate photo-realistic illustration of the building be infringement, even if it's not photograph based? Derivative work doesn't need to be derived directly from the environment. Your illustrations are a floor-by-floor recreation of the buildings. They are far more detailed than, say, me sketching the building on a napkin with pencil. There may be gray area about some illustrations, but I don't see your illustrations as gray area. I like them a lot, they are clearly useful, and if there's a way we can keep them, I'm all for it but we need a clear rationale. - Themightyquill (talk) 07:53, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It can be uploaded locally to Wikipedias as fair use in order to represent a building structure (for those Wikipedias that disabled local uploading entirely, I don't know). --Obsuser (talk) 03:04, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Themightyquill and Obsuser. Can someone tell me how the image can be modified to be acceptable? For example, is it OK if the dimetric view of the tower on the left was removed? Also, can the article have a prominent comment so that editors needn't spend days of work just to see their effort deleted? Cheers, '⎆ 23:30, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
P.S. Lastly, can someone update Commons:Freedom_of_panorama to make it clear that drawings are treated similarly to photographs? '⎆ 23:50, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Deleted per above: this is clearly a reproduction of the architectural work. Guanaco (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates!

Ras67 (talk) 23:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted per nomination --Ruthven (msg) 12:53, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

No freedom of panorama in the UAE

Themightyquill (talk) 13:47, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 17:45, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

no FoP in the UAE

Saqib (talk) 04:11, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted - per nomination - Jcb (talk) 14:51, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates!

Ras67 (talk) 15:05, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain how and why you can on the same day upload a number of pictures of the skyline of Dubai, including also the Burj Khalifa, and request deletion for similar uploads – what is your endgame? Jürgen Eissink (talk) 15:44, 6 January 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Hi, I believe there is no copyright to these public images in the UAE .Category:Burj Khalifa. Is it possible to give us one reason to delete these images which are public photos and there is nothing wrong with posting them here!?.Usamasaad 17:04, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

There is no endgame, it seems to be consensus that skyline photo of a specific subject are free due to de minimis. A full frame depiction of a building in UAE can not be hosted on Commons due to the lack of panorama of freedom. Every image must be able to use commercially and this is here not the case. --Ras67 (talk) 17:51, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted - per nomination. Kept only File:Fog on Burj Khalifah.Dubai. - panoramio.jpg and File:برج خليفة في دبي2.jpg. --Ruthven (msg) 18:43, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates!

Ras67 (talk) 22:33, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nom. --Majora (talk) 20:54, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Burj Khalifa was designed by Adrian Smith.

Ras67 (talk) 16:15, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nom. It is not de minimis if what is being photographed is the main subject of the photograph. The entry way would still be part of the copyright and we cannot keep any of these. --Majora (talk) 20:58, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP in UAE

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 05:12, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some files doesn't necessarily depict Burj Khalifa as the main subject but FOP still applies on other skyscrapers. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 09:16, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Too little carefulness in the files' selection. Many of them were already nominated in a deletion request and were kept. One file has now two deletion requests! A skyline should be free, but only the broad ones.
 Keep for all old nominated and kept files (no new reasons were given).
 Keep for broad skyline photos (almost the whole city).
 Delete What is with CollageDubai.jpg? Was the DR properly closed? IMHO also the new one is not correct, a (cropped out) single part image of the Burj Al Arab and of two other buildings can't be assessed as de minimis!
 Delete for photos of the Burj with fountains etc. and all others. --Ras67 (talk) 13:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ras67: As per Themightyquill, there are various copyrighted buildings in the picture and having all of them as DM doesn't eliminate the copyvio infringement. If you're talking in the POV that Burj Khalifa is the main DR reason, I've mentioned above that "Some files doesn't necessarily depict Burj Khalifa as the main subject but FOP still applies on other skyscrapers." (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 13:57, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that and agree with you, but where is the border? Strictly speaking we have to delete all with copyrighted objects in the UAE. This can not be it. Warm regards --Ras67 (talk) 14:21, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ras67: I would say that only having a single small enough copyrighted building as DM would be ok. For example, File:Burj Khalifa @ Yellow Boats Tour @ Dubai (15876740342).jpg might probably the threshold of DM as the design of the building is "too small" in the picture to be seen. I wonder why File:Skyline-Dubai-2010.jpg was kept with the reason of "Panoramic view of the city" per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Category:Burj Khalifa (as File:Burj Khalifa 005.JPG in the DR) when FOP applies to all buildings and not BK only. However, this is only my opinion and this is the problem about DM, there is no benchmark. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 15:33, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm with you, it's a difficult matter with blurred borders, the closing admin has to decide it. --Ras67 (talk) 18:56, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have trouble accepting that the burj khalifa is really de minimis in an image titled "Burj Khalifa" and in the category Category:Burj Khalifa. If it's an image of the skyline of Dubai, it should be renamed as such and it should not be in this category. It should not be used to illustrate articles on the Burj Khalifa. De Minimis is an exception, not a loophole. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:33, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted, but some are  kept. I commented some files. Taivo (talk) 20:47, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Derived work from copyrighted photos/buildings/designs what we cannot host here! We need the permission of the actual creators for a free licencing of their work.

Ras67 (talk) 17:46, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete per nom, COM:FOP UAE, and all the previous sections.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 15:46, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Speedy delete as derivative work copyvios. No permissions or OTRS authorizations from model creators, images uploaded by a problematic user (who has uploaded dozens of DW/no FOP violations, as seen in their talk page. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:58, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 04:59, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

To the 21st one and eternal further, no freedom of panorama in UAE! Why we are the sole ones who protect Adrian Smith's rights? It seems to me, that the rest of the world is not interested in this case. IMHO the skylines are copyrighted too.

@JWilz12345: If so, we can change this file name and keep this file. Ox1997cow (talk) 09:27, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: And we can also undelete deleted file and rename deleted file. Ox1997cow (talk) 09:31, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The illuminated background is an essential part of the photos and not a casual element. The whole background consists of copyrighted skyscrapers. --Ras67 (talk) 21:20, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ras67:  Comment I think main object in this image is the car. Ox1997cow (talk) 22:34, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 I withdraw my nomination Ox1997cow (talk) 22:34, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 I withdraw my nomination Ox1997cow (talk) 22:34, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: I read this page carefully. In this page, I found this sentence. "Cityscape, skyline, or vista photos may be acceptable if no single building is the primary subject." It means that both cityscape photos and skyline photos are allowed. And this page contains outdated content. For example, Atomium in Belgium is allowed now because Belgium has freedom of panorama now, but this page explains that Atomium is not allowed. Ox1997cow (talk) 04:22, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ox1997cow: slashed my vdel input. While the page is outdated for Atomium, it is still relevant for Burj Khalifa and Burj al Arab, as long as there is no acceptable FOP from UAE. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:06, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ras67 (talk) 02:41, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ras67:  Keep Already in past discussions, it has been concluded that some images were kept covered by DM. Ox1997cow (talk) 04:09, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@A1Cafel:  Comment In my opinion, some of other files you didn't marked maybe to be kept. Ox1997cow (talk) 11:27, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ox1997cow: You may also mark those you think can be kept. --A1Cafel (talk) 13:46, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete per nom, COM:FOP UAE, and all the previous sections (except those given keep reasons by A1Cafel or Ox1997cow).   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 13:42, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@A1Cafel and Jeff G.: I marked whether delete or keep. I will respectfully accept any objection. Ox1997cow (talk) 14:01, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, the skylines are not {{Deminimis}}. Every building in these images is copyrighted, it's not in the "sense" of the law to "stack" copyrighted objects and so make them free. The "deminimised" objects have to be "nonessential" and "casual" elements, what is not the case in the skyline photographs. Regards --Ras67 (talk) 21:20, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ras67:  Comment Already in past discussion, it has been concluded that the skylines are DM. Ox1997cow (talk) 22:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: Lack of freedom of panorama does not mean that we cannot create categories of copyrighted buildings or sculptures. So, why does categories of copyrighted games exist? (Such as Category:StarCraft, Category:Overwatch, Category:Call of Duty, etc...) Ox1997cow (talk) 12:47, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If the skyline photo incidentally contains copyrighted buildings, these photos are allowed under de minimis. Categories of buildings or sculptures in countries without freedom of panorama exist for this kind of situation. Ox1997cow (talk) 12:56, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ox1997cow: see Category:Sólfar (a copyrighted sculpture in Iceland, with all files deleted via Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Sólfar). See also Category:SM City San Pedro. For buildings, they can go under Category:Buildings in Dubai or Category:Skyscrapers in Dubai. This category has been abused IMO, and it seems new uploaders ignore warnings on top. Also if the category needs to be nuked, this should be locked until the year the building falls PD or UAE changes their copyright law. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:31, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: That's an extreme case. When uploading to the category of copyrighted things, there is no problem if we follow the warning and upload. Ox1997cow (talk) 14:07, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: By the way, why are you taking the extreme case and giving it as an example? In the previous deletion discussion, you used that only examples of misuse of NoFoP templates were taken as examples, and you claimed that all NoFoP templates should be changed with something like {{NoFoP-Japan}}. Ox1997cow (talk) 14:19, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ox1997cow: the simple answer is that the {{NoUploads}} are, in my opinion, ineffective. I doubt most uploaders will understand what the template means in relation to copyrighted FOP-reliant works: works like buildings, sculptures, statues, monuments, memorials, and public murals/frescoes. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:41, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: My opinion is different. The reason is that many users don't know that freedom of panorama varies by country. Ox1997cow (talk) 14:44, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Soumya-8974:  Oppose Some images were kept due to DM before. Ox1997cow (talk) 04:06, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Burj Khalifa should be a trivial landmark (i.e. should not be at the centre of an image) per COM:DM, but it is too prominent in most of the listed images. Apologies for !voting all listed images to delete without seeing them individually. --Soumya-8974 (he) (talkcontribs) 08:23, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Soumya-8974: I and A1Cafel have already marked "deleted" and "kept" on images that are likely to be deleted and images that are likely to be kept. Also, already in the previous deletion discussion, it was concluded that the skyline image is DM as the single buildings might be copyrighted, but the whole panorama is not. Ox1997cow (talk) 10:33, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Some skyline images are under discussion at Commons:Deletion requests/Burj Khalifa-related.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 11:56, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To end all this mess because of limited exception (broadcasting programs only) in UAE copyright law, are there any attempts by Wikipedians in UAE and Arab Wikipedians to have FOP introduced in the desert kingdom? At the very least, FOP for architecture only (similar to US and Russian exceptions)? @A1Cafel, Ox1997cow, Ras67, Botev, Jeff G., and Soumya-8974: JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@JWilz12345: I'm sorry, but I've never heard of such a thing. Ox1997cow (talk) 10:08, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Why we are the sole ones who protect Adrian Smith's rights" note that I do not care about Adrian Smith's right, I do not care about UAE law. If I nominate things for deletion I do it to protect users of Commons. This law is unjust, though if for some reason I would have influence on UAE I would start from far worse laws being present there Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And for this nomination: keep everything, nominate actually problematic ones for a proper review Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep as indiscriminate. Cut out any skyline pictures, they are clearly de minimis. Individually nominate the rest. We aren’t here to “right great wrongs” by protecting the copyright of an architect who has low enough ethical standards to work in a country where being gay is illegal. Dronebogus (talk) 02:32, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: followed remarks of @Ox1997cow and A1Cafel: and many thanks for your efforts. In some case followed arguments of other users. General skylines kept according consensus. Thanks all for your efforts. --Ellywa (talk) 15:34, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


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

The architecture is copyrighted e.g. by Adrian Smith, see COM:TOYS!


Ras67 (talk) 02:54, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ras67:  Delete They are clearly {{Copyvio}}. Ox1997cow (talk) 04:13, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete per nom, COM:FOP UAE, and all the previous sections.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 13:40, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Speedy delete derivative work copyright violation: appears to be toys or small-scale models. May also fulfill User:Elcobbola/Models. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete per COM:TOYS--A1Cafel (talk) 07:56, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

deleted, per nomination and discussion. Elly (talk) 21:34, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates, per COM:FOP UAE. The Burj Khalifa is still copyrighted. Also derivatives (such as lego models) are copyrighted. Reason: the building was completed in 2008.

This image is deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Burj Khalifa (Pexels-1537493).jpg. Ox1997cow (talk) 14:47, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Elly (talk) 21:12, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree not to delete File:Dubai skyline 2010 (censored Burj Khalifa).jpg, because the tower is blackened and details cannot be seen. Elly (talk) 21:39, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete all but File:Dubai skyline 2010 (censored Burj Khalifa).jpg per Elly.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 22:39, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete all except File:Dubai skyline 2010 (censored Burj Khalifa).jpg per Elly SHB2000 (talk) 11:22, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand. Surely most/all those other buildings are subject to copyright as well. Either all buildings in this image (including Burj Khalifa) de minimis or all are subject to copyright restrictions, no? -- Themightyquill (talk) 07:56, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Themightyquill: Already the decision has been made that the single buildings might be copyrighted but the whole panorama is not. See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Skyline-Dubai-2010.jpg. Ox1997cow (talk) 10:42, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ox1997cow: That was my understanding as well - so I didn't see the need to black out the tower in that image. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:10, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe a sub-category like Category:Skylines in Dubai including the Burj Khalifa would be useful? -- 06:13, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
@Themightyquill: Not bad. Ox1997cow (talk) 06:52, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And we can make a sub-category like Category:Skylines in Seoul including Lotte World Tower. (There is no freedom of panorama in South Korea, too.) Ox1997cow (talk) 06:59, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ox1997cow and Themightyquill: impractical, and can lead to abuse. The best approach is that all skyline inages must be categorized under Category:Skylines in Dubai and similar categories. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:26, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: I don't think it's impractical, but I suspect you're right about leading to abuse. Just a thought - I'm not determined. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:52, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345 and Themightyquill: However, existing building name categories(For example, Category:Burj Khalifa, Category:Lotte World Tower, etc.) should be kept. It is intended to be used in a photo of the skyline that contains the building. Ox1997cow (talk) 17:00, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have marked {{vk}} on images that can obviously applied de minimis. Ox1997cow (talk) 10:42, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ox1997cow: I have signed your markings for you. Please sign such markings yourself in the future.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 12:43, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G.: Oh, that's my mistake. Ox1997cow (talk) 13:39, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: Has anyone contacted Adrian Smith to request permission? If so, then I'm assuming he said no? Ixfd64 (talk) 01:44, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If I've not misheard, Adrian Smith is currently in a jail in Saudi Arabia. --Soumya-8974 (he) (talkcontribs) 08:22, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Soumya-8974 and Ixfd64: for a more eternal or longterm approach, has anyone including Arab Wikipedians and Wikipedians based in UAE have taken steps to introduce FOP there, at least "for buildings only" (yellow countries)? I expect dozens of more copyvio images to be uploaded here, including: this one. I'm not sure if people aren't aware of no FOP there or just intentionally "testing our no-FOP policy on UAE". I would also want to suggest filtering out exactly the words "Burj Khalifa" so that new users will no longer be able to upload images either containing the said words in their file names or in their file descriptions, at least temporarily (while UAE has no FOP for photos). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:16, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: Excessive file name restrictions are bad. Suppose someone uploaded a file name of the Dubai Skyline with Burj Khalifa as "Remote view of Burj Khalifa". Skyline photos with Burj Khalifa are allowed even if there is no freedom of panorama in UAE, as last deletion discussion concluded that they were OK. If you ban the use of "Burj Khalifa" in file names, we won't be able to upload acceptable skyline or cityscape photos. Ox1997cow (talk) 11:57, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: And many people do not know freedom of panorama. I also mistakenly thought that the copyright of a building or sculpture photo belonged to the person who took it, until I saw numerous photos of the building or sculpture deleted from Wikimedia Commons. Ox1997cow (talk) 11:59, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ox1997cow: no, de minimis photos can still be uploaded, thru titles like "Dubai skyline 20211103.JPG", "Skyline of Dubai, UAE as seen from the Marina in 2019.jpg." If images bearing such file names continue to be uploaded, the location filled with millions of deleted files from late-2006 may become "crowded" in the very distant future. Besides files do not get "deleted" in real life, but rather all "deleted" files are still there, just hidden from non-admins (as per Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) on his reply here). See also w:Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2006-06-19/Image undeletion on the mechanism of files deleted on Wikipedia (which also applies to all Wiki sites). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:33, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: You're thinking too extreme. A lot of users will use the copyrighted building name in the file name, but can we ban the copyrighted building name in the file name? And did you think about typos? (For example, "Bur Kalifa", "Buri Khaljfa", etc.) Ox1997cow (talk) 15:37, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: I've known you're an extreme claimant since you had the deletion discussion related NoFoP templates. Even in that discussion, you brought only cases where NoFoP templates were misused and insisted that use of NoFoP templates should only be used in category namespace. Even if use of NoFoP templates is changed to be used in category namespace, there is no guarantee that it will not be misused. Ox1997cow (talk) 15:46, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ox1997cow: I look on longterm solutions and not "band-aid" solutions. Thus it is best to filter out such names. Actually Commons has already did a version of what you call very extreme approach: indefinite protection of file names that is comonly misused. Example: File:Burj Khalifa.jpg. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:21, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That approach of locking the file name prompted me to suggest such. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:26, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: Keep that in mind. Such long-term solutions can hurt many users. Even though it is forbidden to use only "Burj Khalifa" in a file name, I know that using a file name containing "Burj Khalifa" is difficult to ban. Ox1997cow (talk) 16:46, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ox1997cow: and also take note of COM:CARES. The copyright holders include the architects and artists of national monuments. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:53, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Soumya-8974: I couldn't find anything about Adrian Smith being incarcerated. His article on the English Wikipedia doesn't say anything either. Could you provide a source? Ixfd64 (talk) 17:43, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, thank you! I have probably misheard a piece of news related to the still-unfinished Jeddah Tower, also designed by Adrian Smith. --Soumya-8974 (he) (talkcontribs) 17:53, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@JWilz12345: Of course I know the copyright holders include the architects and artists of national monuments. Anyway, even though I agree to ban file name containing only "Burj Khalifa", I cannot accept your extreme argument of banning file names containing "Burj Khalifa". Ox1997cow (talk) 16:57, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As a compromise, how about using the edit filter to just warn the user if they try to upload a picture containing the name? Ixfd64 (talk) 17:44, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ixfd64: It's not bad. Ox1997cow (talk) 06:14, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Burj Khalifa Interpretation Centre.jpg. Ox1997cow (talk) 14:43, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep skyline images. De minimis use of the Burj Khalifa, there’s a precedent for this. The freedom of panorama page of English Wikipedia literally shows a skyline in a non-FOP country. I struggle to see why the images that just show the base aren’t de minimis but that’s not my expertise. The blacked-out version is artistically interesting but a ridiculous solution to a nonexistent problem (buildings are not more copyrighted because they’re famous and impossible not to notice in a generic panorama!) Dronebogus (talk) 15:06, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kept General DR like this one is clearly not helpful. Yann (talk) 21:05, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Angad mandal (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unused personal image : out of scope

Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:40, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

unused personal image, out of scope like the other two

Guanaco (talk) 17:49, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:44, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Useless with the current amount of information. Out of scope. Castillo blanco (talk) 09:21, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:45, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright violation. Non-free material from Yamanashi Prefectural Maglev Exhibition Center [3] in Japan. --Batholith (talk) 13:01, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:45, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Wilgimon (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:20, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:45, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Achille C. (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Historical photos and map. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:33, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:48, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by 04149183Y (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Official symbols and document. Proper license tag should be used if it's in public domain.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:49, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Replace by the animated version File:NOAA Irma Jose Katia Sept 7.gif 158.182.178.61 03:52, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Not a valid reason for deletion. You don't always want an animated version. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:45, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

A higher quality duplicate file exists. File:10 Akşa - Tannu Tuva (1935) 01.jpg SpanishSnake (talk) 03:08, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: replaced with a redirect. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 11:33, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

"Photo of deceased celebrity" is not a valid reason a work can enter the public domain. Copyrights apparently owned by Life magazine or original photographer. --Animalparty (talk) 00:37, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination (how did this survive for so long?). P 1 9 9   18:36, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

1975 photo from the Chicago Tribune. The author is given as "Dr. David Ansell" but there is no evidence that that person is the original photographer, he is just an author using the image on his website to advertise his book. Have to assume the photo is copyrighted unless there is evidence otherwise, including info about the actual photographer. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 05:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   19:22, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

The copyright policy of the Cornell Medicine website that the images (both files uploaded, apparently) are from is here and it says nothing about allowing "anyone to use if for any purpose" as the uploader's tag claims, they are just copyrighted. There is also an extensive document on copyright infringements. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 06:57, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This photo was added by specific permission of the subject, however I do not know how to indicate that. --Ibibble (talk) 13:22, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • The subject of the photo doesn't actually own the rights to it; the permission we would need would come from Cornell, which has copyrighted it, and possibly the photographer who took the photo, if they still own the rights. I know it is complicated, but there is no other way we can accept a copyrighted photo. Thanks for your efforts, though. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 00:09, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   19:24, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Uploader states this is from the Dana Farber Cancer Institute website, the current version is here, and copyright information is at the bottom of the page ("Material on the Dana-Farber website is protected by copyright law. Unless otherwise stated, users may print or download information from this site for personal, non-commercial use only.") Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 07:04, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   19:23, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Author request, have better version East Malaysia location map with districts.svg *angys* (talk) 08:21, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per self-nomination, superseded by File:East Malaysia location map with districts.svg. P 1 9 9   19:27, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Author request, have better version File:West Malaysia location map with districts.svg *angys* (talk) 08:22, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per self-nomination. P 1 9 9   19:27, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal image of a smiling lady. No locks of love or other interesting thing in the file. E4024 (talk) 08:25, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   19:30, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Doubts about this being own work; a smaller version of this file is available here: http://www.mujeresaseguir.com/empresas/noticia/1100205048515/una-idea-no-vale-nada-hasta-que-no-la-pones-en-marcha.1.html Savhñ 10:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   19:31, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate image Ravi Cool guy (talk) 11:12, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Duplicate of what? Anyway, seeing that this is a self-nomination, I assume he wants it deleted as a courtesy. Personal out-of-scope photo anyway. P 1 9 9   19:33, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete Not a notable person [4], [5]. ——Chalk19 (talk) 11:30, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   19:39, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

bad quality, no encyclopedic worth Hugo.arg (talk) 13:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: more than adequate quality, in scope. P 1 9 9   19:45, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

bad quality, no encyclopedic worth Hugo.arg (talk) 13:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   19:45, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Same as previous deleted files: File:Banat, flag (proposed).png, File:Banat, proposed flag.png, File:The proposed (unofficial) flag of the Banat.jpg, see the discussions: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Banat, flag (proposed).png, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Banat, proposed flag.png, Commons:Deletion requests/File:The proposed (unofficial) flag of the Banat.jpg. It seems to be an insistence on launching an irredentist movement that does not appear in any reliable source. Turbojet (talk) 17:48, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   19:46, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Original research Mentatus (talk) 09:34, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See also above, PetrusdictusA keeps uploading his previously deleted images over and over. Mentatus (talk) 11:57, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:28, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

See also the discussion: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Steagul Banatului cu Stemă.png. Since 1921 Banat has official coat of arms, even if the uploader or others do not like it. Is no need for another county coat of arms, there is any separatist movement of the province. A proposal coat of arms can be considered if it is officially proposed by an organization. Before being formally adopted, that image can only illustrate the article about the organization that proposes it, provided it is mentioned in reliable sources. After it is officially adopted, it will illustrate the articles to which it refers. For now, the proposed image is solely the suggestion of the uploader. Such images cannot illustrate any article. So, the images cannot be preserved. Turbojet (talk) 17:54, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your ignorance seems to have no limits. As all ignorant Romanians you seem to forget the fact that only half of the Banat is now under your country's occupation since 1921. This coat of arms represents the whole territory, not only the one Romania has occupied, and to which Romania invented a different history and symbols. PetrusdictusA (talk) 23:56, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The uploader does not want to understand that he cannot himself create a coat of arms for the whole territory of the historic Banat. For the whole territory of the historic Banat, split by the Treaty of Trianon, only a coat of arms used before 1920 can be used. The coat of arms that existed was the Swabian coat of arms.
For the Romanian side of Banat, after 1920, the coat of arms that can be used is the Romanian one from 1921.
For the Serbian side of Banat, after 1920, today part of Vojvodina, the coat of arms that can be used is that of Vojvodina, also used by Serbian Wikipedia.
The province for which the user has created this current coat of arms no longer exists. This coat of arms expresses only a user's nostalgia about the Hungarians ruled this province before Trianon. --Turbojet (talk) 11:28, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   19:48, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused (personal) file, or 'profiling', or, potentially personality right isusses, hence, potentially non-free content - your opinions ? Roland zh (talk) 19:55, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   19:48, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Far from being made of "simple shapes" Discasto talk 07:09, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lee en Commons:Threshold of originality, que son formas simples (Reiterados ataques y advertencia temprana procede a tomar medidas)--Victor Gibby (talk) 01:54, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted, this is not a simple logo. Taivo (talk) 08:15, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

web-quality, unlikely to be uploader's own work Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:07, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, likely copyright violation. Photographer should confirm license via OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 14:56, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

unlikely to be uploader's own work, unclear source Jon Kolbert (talk) 03:26, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination, likely copyright violation. Photographer should confirm license via OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 14:56, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

The direct link is dead but files from that website are under a Noncommercial CC license, which is not compatible with Commons. The uploader states they have an email containing permission to use the photo, but that would need to be processed through Commons:OTRS. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 05:32, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Copyright holder must confirm a commons-compatible license by following the instructions on OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 14:57, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

From a blog, which has at the bottom of the page "Positively Gina by Gina DeLorenzo is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License." This license cannot be used on Commons. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 05:39, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, see COM:L for commons-compatible licenses. --Storkk (talk) 15:00, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Flickr washing - please look at other photos under "Julia Montes" 173.52.89.245 20:09, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, likely Flickrwashed. Photographer should verify authorship and license via OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 15:03, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

False date, found elsewhere such as http://assets.media-marketing.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/zejnep-dereli-ce-govoriti-na-ovogodisnjoj-pro-pr-konferenciji-u-budvi-1024x1024.jpeg Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:20, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, likely copyright violation. Photographer should confirm authorship and license via OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 15:04, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

http://meral.xyz/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Kaan-terzioglu.jpg Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:23, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, likely copyright violation. Photographer should confirm authorship and license via OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 15:04, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

False date, unlikely to be own work. Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:39, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, likely copyright violation. Photographer should confirm authorship and license via OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 15:04, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

False date, found at https://tblg-mag.k-img.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/mimasan.jpg Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, likely copyright violation. Photographer should confirm authorship and license via OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 15:04, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small raster (Category:Ascaridole has higher quality raster and also vector versions). Admin note: if kept, please rename to correct the spelling of the chemical. DMacks (talk) 20:52, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Leyo 10:28, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

https://tblg-mag.k-img.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/mimasan.jpg Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yasu (talk) 15:16, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted file, he is clearly not the owner of it. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 02:50, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do not claim to be the owner. This is a screenshot from a video posted with a CC-BY-3.0 license. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 03:08, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: valid license. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:09, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted file, he is clearly not the owner of it. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 02:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do not claim to be the owner. This is a screenshot from a video posted with a CC-BY-3.0 license. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 03:10, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: valid license. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:09, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looks like there is the text of an email supposedly giving permission to use the photo, but this needs to be sent to Commons:OTRS for verification. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 05:27, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:12, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photos from this website are copyrighted and attributed to individual photographers; the uploader states they have permission, but this will need to be verified through Commons:OTRS. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 05:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:13, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

The date of first publication by source is unknown + present-day colorization.

Maxinvestigator (talk) 06:18, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: not public domain. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:13, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

The uploader states this photo was "taken from the IOM website." Need to know what website that is and whether photos from that website are under a license compatible with Commons. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 06:23, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:14, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is from a book published by the World Health Organization and it is not public domain but copyrighted as indicated on its title page which is here (pdf file). Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 06:33, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:14, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looks like a copyrighted pic. Please see: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4141047/mediaviewer/rm1048510464. E4024 (talk) 07:00, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:15, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

No source tag has been removed. E4024 (talk) 07:53, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm not very sure of the authenticity of this flag, and was planning to DR a smaller one, File:Persian Flag2.jpg, until I saw the edit above. Although source was shown as "own work", I wanted to attract the attention to the presence of two flags, none of which are used. The rest is for other colleagues to opine and the closing admin to act. No strong feelings either way. --E4024 (talk) 07:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: unclear copyright situation. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:17, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not sure about the claim of own work. Found it on FB https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1273234726084597&id=118076764933738 Gbawden (talk) 11:10, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Image is not from Facebook, our version is also older. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:18, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not sure about the claim of own work, found it here https://twitter.com/drkevincampbell?lang=en and on FB Gbawden (talk) 11:18, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:19, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Found everywhere such as https://images.assettype.com/thequint%2F2015-08%2Fe0a83543-93fe-47a8-984e-57046a171df4%2FIsmat%20Chughtai-twitter%3AAntiserious.png?q=35&auto=format%2Ccompress&w=1200. Unvalid date, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 11:42, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Caution: this image was uploaded in November 2015. Any image that long on Commons will eventually be found everywhere on the internet. How do you know it predates this upload? --P 1 9 9   19:42, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
With missing EXIF files I'm not sure this image was uploaded in November 2015. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:56, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
EXIF data has nothing to do with upload date; it only tells you when it was taken (and then only if the camera's date and time were set right). Just look at the file history: this file was upload on Commons on 16 November 2015. --P 1 9 9   13:30, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@P199: Then here's the same picture appearing October 29, 2015 with the mention : Twitter. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 15:22, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: own work unlikely. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:52, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Found everywhere such as https://images.assettype.com/thequint%2F2015-08%2Fe0a83543-93fe-47a8-984e-57046a171df4%2FIsmat%20Chughtai-twitter%3AAntiserious.png?q=35&auto=format%2Ccompress&w=1200. Unvalid date, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 11:43, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: own work unlikely. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:52, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Ringerfan23 as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: obv. copyvio. no sourcing, proshot image. Big photo with EXIF data, used in en.wiki. We can discuss this for a week. Google image search gives no hits. Taivo (talk) 11:54, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: unlikely to be own work, the image found by E4024 seems to be a crop of this one, indeed. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:55, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

The license was never reviewed and now, 5 years after upload, the source site is down. PD-self is very strange license for company websites. Probably we must now delete the photo. Taivo (talk) 12:13, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:55, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

something has gone wrong with this upload and the file isn't displaying correctly AHollender (WMF) (talk) 14:19, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: file seems fine, even if preview is broken. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:56, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Although here's only 3 cubes on the logo, the cubes are placed in such extraordinary way, that this can be a complex logo. That case OTRS-permission from company representative is needed. Source country is Switzerland. Taivo (talk) 13:50, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • (Original uploader comment) It looks like a borderline case to me. The threshold of originality in Switzerland appears to be fairly high and Swiss courts seem to look whether the piece of art "distinguishes itself from what is common use".[6] Are these three colour cubes really above threshold of originality? See [7].
I agree: this is borderline case. Opinions of other users are welcomed. Taivo (talk) 11:46, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: COM:PRP. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:57, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete It is difficult to believe that this low quality picture, which lacks metadata as well, is "own work" of user Dr. Harry Gouvas, that was actually shot by him. It is harder to believe this statement of ownership, since user Harry Gouvas has (in Commons, el/WP, and en/WP) a big record of copyright violations of photos and image manipulations (see: [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13] etc.), and even at least one case of pure forgery and blatant hoax [14]. Probably someone else's photo scanned or downloaded by user Harrygouvas. ——Chalk19 (talk) 13:56, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:57, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Too recent. No FoP in France for contemporary architecture. The file can be moved to French WP where fair use is authorized for buildings. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:56, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:57, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright may apply to those lighting fixtures. Commons:TOO doesn't apply here and there's no FoP in France. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:58, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

False date, unlikely to be own work. Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:25, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:58, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

No copyright license given for the performance/recording. Audio files of songs must have license for both the composition and performance. Even if the composition is in the public domain the performance may be copyrighted. – Illegitimate Barrister (talkcontribs), 18:23, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:59, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright violation: picture is not uploaded by the photographer who has not released their rights Ecritures (talk) 18:28, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose
Dear Ecritures et al,
See this discussion (in Dutch). For non-native Dutch speakers a summary:

Someone takes my smartphone to make what was meant to be a selfie, because both my hands were occupied as you see. Now you know I'm the subject. Every time you do this you have to ask that person - if you know them or not - to provide a free license? I think it's obvious it is, if not you would not accept the camera from the subject. In this case she even offered to make this photograph and was happy with the result.
What would have been the right license-tags in these cases?
Met twee maten meten it is called in Dutch. Klaas `Z4␟` V11:09, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: we would need the photographer's permission. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 21:00, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright violation Felviper (talk) 16:31, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:40, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Triplecaña as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The new EIB logo is protected by legal registration, notably with the WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization). see [15]
Converted to DR by me, as there has been a DR previously. -- Túrelio (talk) 20:19, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

While prima vista the logo seems to be simple, the above cited source[16] suggest a rather elaborated and studied design of this logo. --Túrelio (talk) 20:26, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Same problem with File:Europeiska investeringsbanken logo.svg. --Túrelio (talk) 20:28, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per previous DR. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 21:01, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Found at http://www.pascaljan.fr/PASCALJANRECTEURcouleur.jpg Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:23, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment This is not the source. Commons version is bigger. Yann (talk) 08:43, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: already deleted by User:Jcb for lack of OTRS permission. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 21:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]