Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2018/05/21
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
![2 File:ВІА "Балада". СВВПБУ-80.jpg](#File:ВІА_"Балада"._СВВПБУ-80.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(1).jpg){kind=link}
_(40219698104).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Commons:Deletion requests/File:208 West George Street (1).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
No metadata, dubious claiom of {{Own work}}. Photographer should confirm license via OTRS. Storkk (talk) 15:59, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:NETCOPYVIO - Here in 02.2013, prior to 03.2013 Commons upload. (Better yet: Photo by Dave M. Benett/Getty Images) --Эlcobbola talk 16:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 18:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
![18:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2018/05/21#c-Jcb-2018-05-21T18:14:00.000Z-File:ВІА_"Балада"._СВВПБУ-80.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: copyvio. --Jcb (talk) 18:17, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
![18:17, 21 May 2018 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2018/05/21#c-Jcb-2018-05-21T18:17:00.000Z-File:ВІА_"Балада"._СВВПБУ-80.jpg){kind=link}
Page created by typo-mistake by new FPC user. Now moved to the right name and this page is redundant. Cart (talk) 12:01, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:06, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
This is an edited version of an image on Flickr. First, CC-BY-SA 2.5 has never been an option on Flickr, only 2.0. Currently, the image is licensed as -nc-nd- on Flickr. Yet, a license review has seen it fit to approve the license despite the discrepancy of license version.
The oldest archive I can find is from 2016, where it was -nc-nd as well. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:08, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Obviously I don't remember the details of an image I cross-wiki'd from 10 years ago, but I don't believe I would have approved it if the license was incompatible with Commons. The person who made the derivative work seems to have released it under the 2.5 license, which would be acceptable as far as I know. Kelly (talk) 22:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah...I'm not doubting you, just wanted to raise the question since it just seemed a tad odd. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:49, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- No, it's good to verify. I'm positive I would have checked the license at Flickr, as at the time I believe I was clearing out Flickr-sourced copyvios from en Wikipedia, and moving any with good licenses over here where the license review template could be attached. Kelly (talk) 23:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination With that, I'll withdraw this. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 23:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- No, it's good to verify. I'm positive I would have checked the license at Flickr, as at the time I believe I was clearing out Flickr-sourced copyvios from en Wikipedia, and moving any with good licenses over here where the license review template could be attached. Kelly (talk) 23:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yeah...I'm not doubting you, just wanted to raise the question since it just seemed a tad odd. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:49, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per above, withdrawn. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 23:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
This image is not available under a Creative Commons Licence. AlbanGeller (talk) 20:41, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted by Ronhjones at 21:13, 21 Mai 2018 UTC: Copyright violation: This image is not available under a Creative Commons Licence. --Krdbot 00:40, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This image is not available under a Creative Commons Licence. AlbanGeller (talk) 20:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted by Ronhjones at 21:12, 21 Mai 2018 UTC: Copyright violation: This image is not available under a Creative Commons Licence. --Krdbot 00:40, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
No indication the author died more than 70 years ago. — Racconish ☎ 16:29, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
|
This photograph is in the public domain in Japan because its copyright has expired according to Article 23 of the 1899 Copyright Act of Japan (English translation) and Article 2 of Supplemental Provisions of Copyright Act of 1970. This is when the photograph meets one of the following conditions:
|
 |
 |
To uploader: Please provide the source and publication date.
|
- This photography was made in the 1930s --Malvoört (talk) 00:59, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
|
|
This pre-1953 Japanese film or image thereof, directed by a person who died more than 38 years ago, is now in the public domain.
This is because in July 2006, a Japanese court ruled that all films produced in Japan prior to 1953 were exempt from a change of copyright law changing the term for cinematographic works from 50 years after publication to 70 years. [1][2][3]. However, the Tokyo District Court ruled on 17 September 2007 that films by Akira Kurosawa (died 1998) remain copyrighted until 2036, ruling that an older pre-1971 law applies. That old law kept copyright protection for 38 years after the creator's death. In 2008, the Intellectual Property High Court affirmed the lower court's decision. The report states the "Japanese Intellectual Property High Court ruling that establishes the Tokyo District Court's September 2007 decision to be correct," and that "the preceding judge Nobuyoshi Tanaka is quoted as stressing that 'the copyright over films is protected for 38 years from the year after the death of the director.'" Please note that public domain works must be out of copyright in both the United States and in the source country of the work in order to be hosted on the Commons. The file must have an additional copyright tag indicating the copyright status in the United States. See also Copyright rules by territory.
|
|
- Sadao Yamanaka died 80 years ago --Malvoört (talk) 01:22, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Kept per Malvoört. — Racconish ☎ 06:47, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
no category Salim Khandoker (talk) 15:37, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Kept, no valid reason for deletion. Afifa Afrin (talk) 14:04, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
private photo Mitte27 (talk) 00:24, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination+anyway it is likely a social media published image (middle size without EXIFs). --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:51, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
Same deleted file or a new one? E4024 (talk) 16:17, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- No, it's not the same image.
- Nevertheless, it likely not own work per [4] and the uploader has even flipped to original image, probably in order to impede detection. --Túrelio (talk) 16:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Эlcobbola talk 17:08, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Copyright violation https://berita.pas.org.my/tag/dato-seri-tuan-guru-haji-abdul-hadi-awang/ *angys* (talk) 05:46, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio at 13:39, 22 Mai 2018 UTC: Obvious copyvio (https://berita.pas.org.my/خطبة-جمعة-برفݢڠ-دڠن-فساك-نبي-صلى-الله-ع/) --Krdbot 18:38, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
источники использованных произведений неизвестны до сих пор Cossrad (talk) 15:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted by Jcb at 22:05, 22 Mai 2018 UTC: Dw no source since 13 May 2018 --Krdbot 00:38, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Дубль файла File:OT-34 in Simferopol (Мау 2015).jpg Mitte27 (talk) 23:38, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination - COM:CSD FIle#8. --Эlcobbola talk 14:37, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Looks like a fan page. More appropriate as an article in en-wiki. Ytoyoda (talk) 20:21, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: Single image gallery is a speedy deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:53, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
This is my Personal Profile Photograph. I no longer need this File to be Public. Dobrescumihai19 (talk) 11:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted, this is the user's only upload. Taivo (talk) 07:51, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
Clearly not a free image https://www.slamonline.com/uncategorized/patrick-beverley-undergoes-season-ending-knee-surgery/ & https://mk0slamonlinensgt39k.kinstacdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/GettyImages-859104162.jpg DaHuzyBru (talk) 07:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: clear copyright violation. --JuTa 13:20, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
http://old.theparentscircle.org/ActivitiesMain.asp?id=125&sivug_id=3 Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:52, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:54, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Personal photo. Out of scope. Kalbbes (talk) 21:56, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:00, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Personal photo. Out of scope. Kalbbes (talk) 21:57, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:59, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Superlittle1 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Copyrighted work by Alfredo Celotti (d. 1991), missing permission.
- File:Neve celotti.jpg
- File:Celotti auto 2.jpg
- File:Frutta celotti.jpg
- File:Fagiano celotti.jpg
- File:Fiori celotti.jpg
- File:S.apollinare.jpg
- File:Ritratto di donna Celotti.jpg
- File:Padre Celotti.jpg
- File:Natura morta cerotti.jpg
- File:Ragazza allo specchio.jpg
- File:Ragazza al bagno celo.jpg
- File:AutoRitrattocelo.jpg
- File:Alfredocelotti1.jpg
- File:Coppa7.jpg
- File:Coppa61.jpg
- File:Coppa6.jpg
- File:Coppa5.jpg
- File:Coppa4.jpg
- File:Coppa2.jpg
- File:Coppa1.jpg
- File:LIBBRO CITA.jpg
- File:NATURA MORTA.jpg
- File:BOSCO CELOTTI.jpg
- File:FIORI CELOTTI.jpg
- File:Alfredo Celotti.jpg
Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:00, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination (note that are included in the deletion some derivative work of trophies). --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:59, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Found everywhere such as https://www.selectspecs.com/fashion-lifestyle/melanie-martinez/ Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:02, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:54, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
http://old.theparentscircle.org/ActivitiesMain.asp?id=125&sivug_id=3 Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:05, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:54, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Personal photo. Out of scope Kalbbes (talk) 22:11, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:53, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Personal photo. Out of scope Kalbbes (talk) 22:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:53, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Personal photo. Out of scope. Kalbbes (talk) 22:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:53, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Personal photo. Out of scope. Kalbbes (talk) 22:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:53, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
All of the works shown here are the work of a living artist and therefore will be under copyright for at least another seventy years. The images cannot be kept on Commons without a free license from the artist(s) using OTRS. Note that such a license will allow anyone to make and sell posters of the paintings and copies of the sculptures.
- File:Sobre el mesón o el portillo 1.jpg
- File:Escultura 2,a (1).jpg
- File:Escultura 3 a (1).jpg
- File:Escultura Oxidada.jpg
- File:Tres para la fiesta.jpg
- File:Tras el Néctar.jpg
- File:Fragmento (de la última cena).jpg
- File:Fiesta y Bodegón.jpg
- File:Escultura 8.jpg
- File:Escultura Amarilla.jpg
- File:Escultura 6.jpg
- File:Escultura roja 2.jpg
- File:Escultura gris.jpg
- File:En los Andes.jpg
- File:Dos cafés.jpg
- File:En el Parque.jpg
- File:Concentración 2.jpg
- File:Dos cafés en Azul.jpg
- File:José Luis Guerrero 2.jpg
- File:José Luis Guerrero.jpg
- File:ESCULTURA 1.jpg
- File:VIANDA.jpg
- File:CAFETERA AZUL.jpg
- File:Sobre el mesón o el portillo.jpg
- File:Amanecer con Café I.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination (note that 1 image seems to be a selfies, but deleted as well as unused personal image). --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:37, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
https://i1.wp.com/phdpu.edu.ua/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/DSC_1082-800x533.jpg?resize=533%2C533&ssl=1 Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:38, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
https://i1.wp.com/phdpu.edu.ua/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/DSC_1082-800x533.jpg?resize=533%2C533&ssl=1 Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:38, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Non-free image MiguelAlanCS (talk) 22:38, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:47, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Unused file in an unsuitable format. Images should not be uploaded as PDF. File:Mowbray3.svg is available instead. De728631 (talk) 22:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Kathisma (talk) 12:45, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:47, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
This is an image of meteo staff of TV station La Sexta with its logo at the back. This is unlikely a personal work as Thomas Hawks claim but more likely a copyrighted photo of the TV station. Pierre cb (talk) 22:55, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - unlikely to be own work. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:50, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
This is an image of meteo staff of TV station La Sexta with its logo at the back. This is unlikely a personal work as Thomas Hawks claim but more likely a copyrighted photo of the TV station. Pierre cb (talk) 22:56, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - unlikely to be own work. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:50, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Personal essay; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:05, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:27, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Blurry, unusable Joanbanjo (talk) 00:05, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 18:20, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:27, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Personal essay; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:06, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Even if this were on topic anywhere in Wikimedia, it's original text which should be stored as Wikitext not PDF.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:02, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:27, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
corrupt file. Out of project scope. -- Geagea (talk) 00:06, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:28, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Ensayo personal; fuera del alcance del proyecto. Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:06, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:28, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Ensayo personal; fuera del alcance del proyecto. Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:06, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:28, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Ensayo personal; fuera del alcance del proyecto. Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:06, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:29, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Unused {{Userpage image}}; out of the project scope. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:13, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:29, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unused {{Userpage image}}; out of the project scope. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:13, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:29, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of scope - self-promotion. Magnolia677 (talk) 08:41, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:33, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Personal CV. Out of scope Zaccarias (talk) 09:45, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:33, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Did not upload correctly - fraction of full file. Stinglehammer (talk) 12:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, corrupted file. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:34, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ribas Hotels Group (talk · contribs)
[edit]Logo images of a Russian hotel business. Found unnotable on ru.wikipedia and got deleted there: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ribas_Hotels_Group
Zaccarias (talk) 13:00, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:35, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
self promotion : out of scope Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:23, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:41, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Unused personal file, self promotion. Also its RD: File:Genetik.jpg E4024 (talk) 14:10, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:42, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image. Mitte27 (talk) 14:23, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:43, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image. Mitte27 (talk) 14:24, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:43, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Out of project scope. Randykitty (talk) 14:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per "Files that contain nothing educational other than raw text". Note that the text in this file was also published at en:w:Puthiyalath Paradevatha Kshethram. --HyperGaruda (talk) 16:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:43, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Сергей1111 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope. Logo images of an Ukrainian construction company whose article has been deleted on uk.wikipedia, see https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOLID_Construction_Company
Zaccarias (talk) 15:47, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:44, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by HECHIZOS Y CONJUROS (talk · contribs)
[edit]Promotional, out of project scope. See also Special:DeletedContributions/HECHIZOS Y CONJUROS and warnings on his talk page.
- File:HECHIZOS Y CONJUROS Horacio Luciani Solis Fernandez (29).jpg
- File:HECHIZOS Y CONJUROS ¿QUE ES UN NIGROMANTE?.jpg
- File:HORACIO LUCIANI SOLIS FERNANDEZ.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Achim (talk) 17:45, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by HECHIZOS Y CONJUROS (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope; not a personal/promotional photo repository.
- File:HECHIZOS Y CONJUROS HORACIO LUCIANI (1).jpg
- File:HECHIZOS Y CONJUROS Horacio Luciani Solis Fernandez (29).jpg
- File:HECHIZOS Y CONJUROS ¿QUE ES UN NIGROMANTE?.jpg
- File:HORACIO LUCIANI SOLIS FERNANDEZ.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
TJH2018talk 16:14, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:48, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by HECHIZOS Y CONJUROS (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope; not a promotional photo repository (third time this user has been on the block for promotional photos...)
- File:¿QUE ES UN DOMINIO DE AMOR?.jpg
- File:¿QUE ES UN RETORNO DE PAREJA?.jpg
- File:¿QUE ES UN AMARRE DE AMOR?.png
- File:HORACIO LUCIANI SOLIS FERNANDEZ HECHIZOS Y CONJUROS (4).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
TJH2018talk 04:22, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 10:54, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
File:Multi-Response Optimization during Electro-Discharge Machining of Super Alloy Inconel 718- Application of PCA-TOPSIS.pdf
[edit]Personal essay; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:02, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:56, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Personal essay; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:56, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Taken from https://twitter.com/sosabileklik/status/883106150425776131?s=21 Ytoyoda (talk) 02:16, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:56, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
copyvio (https://f5.folha.uol.com.br/celebridades/2018/01/caua-reymond-diz-que-foi-tranquilo-transar-com-matheus-nachtergaele.shtml) Joalpe (talk) 03:17, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:56, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Exif has "FBMD", appears to be grabbed from Facebook. Дима Г (talk) 03:27, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:56, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
as the exif suggests, this is a grab from Facebook, unless true provenance is evident, along with the right release, this should be deleted —SpacemanSpiff 07:08, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:57, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
http://sportsworldghana.com/exclusivejapanese-club-set-to-sign-ghana-defender-lamine-moro/ Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:09, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:57, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
https://www.africatopsports.com/2015/12/07/gambie-raoul-savoy-nest-plus-selectionneur/ Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:11, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:57, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
http://www.telagabiru.com.my/penulis/dr-maszlee-malik Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:57, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Any metadata, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:57, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Found at http://rotter.net/cgi-bin/forum/dcboard.cgi?az=printer_format&om=6137&forum=gil, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Found everywhere such as https://matome.naver.jp/odai/2147461589991139901/2147461643491703303 Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:37, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Found at http://m.trivela.uol.com.br/os-50-anos-do-titulo-que-eternizou-um-timaco-do-manchester-city-o-campeonato-ingles-de-1967-68/, any permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:43, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Found at http://m.trivela.uol.com.br/os-50-anos-do-titulo-que-eternizou-um-timaco-do-manchester-city-o-campeonato-ingles-de-1967-68/, any permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:43, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Found at http://m.trivela.uol.com.br/os-50-anos-do-titulo-que-eternizou-um-timaco-do-manchester-city-o-campeonato-ingles-de-1967-68/, any permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Similar to http://mashables.in/paisa-vasool-heroine-musskan-sethi-bio-hot-images-gallery/, false date, any metadata, unlikely to be own work. Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:16, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Similar to https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/969464332793741312/FAOwedGN_400x400.jpg,any metadata, unlikely to be own work Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
https://pratt.duke.edu/about/news/bejan-franklin-award Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:58, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2017/07/prweb14543356.htm Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:59, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Not own work, false date, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:36, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. -- Geagea (talk) 12:39, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Films by Alice Guy-Blaché
[edit]Alice Guy died in 1968. These French films are still in copyright in the source country. And the additional soundtrack is also copyrighted
- File:1896-alice-guy-fee-au-chou.webm
- File:1897-alice-guy-baignade-dans-un-torrent.webm
- File:1898-alice-guy-cambrioleurs.webm
- File:1899-alice-guy-bonne-absinthe.webm
— Racconish ☎ 16:06, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Films by Alice Guy-Blaché
[edit]Alice Guy died in 1968. These French films are still in copyright in the source country. Les Fredaines de Pierrette and Saharet are my own bad.
- File:1898-alice-guy-aveugle-fin-de-siecle.webm
- File:1906-alice-guy-hierarchie-dans-amour.webm
- File:1906-alice-guy-madame-a-des-envies.webm
- File:1907-alice-guy-glu.webm
- File:Les Fredaines de Pierrette (1900).webm
- File:Saharet le bolero (1905).webm
— Racconish ☎ 16:09, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Films by Alice Guy-Blaché
[edit]Stills of copyrighted films : since Alice Guy died in 1968, these French films are still in copyright in the source country.
- File:1906 Altitude controls front view AliceGuy.jpg
- File:Anatomie du conscrit.jpg
- File:Chirurgie fin de siècle.jpg
- File:Danse des saisons.jpg
- File:Le Tango.jpg
- File:Resultats du feminisme.jpg
- File:Saharet bolero.jpg
— Racconish ☎ 16:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Films by Alice Guy-Blaché
[edit]Author died in 1968.
- File:1902-alice-guy-sage-femme-de-premiere-classe.webm
- File:1906-alice-guy-resultats-du-feminisme.webm
— Racconish ☎ 17:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 00:02, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Link provided, specifically says (C) 1980 Ediciones de la Flor Alexf (talk) 19:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted by Storkk at 15:13, 31 Mai 2018 UTC: Mass deletion of pages added by Unknown contributor123 - copyright violations, re-uploading previously deleted files --Krdbot 18:31, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:(Manuel Pizarro) Jornadas Económicas Abiertas del PP de Moncloa-Aravaca (7010588059) (cropped).jpg Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted by Storkk at 15:13, 31 Mai 2018 UTC: Mass deletion of pages added by Unknown contributor123 - copyright violations, re-uploading previously deleted files --Krdbot 18:31, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Gladys González Prensa 2015.png Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:43, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted by Storkk at 15:13, 31 Mai 2018 UTC: Mass deletion of pages added by Unknown contributor123 - copyright violations, re-uploading previously deleted files --Krdbot 18:31, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Prensa 4.jpg Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:45, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted by Storkk at 15:13, 31 Mai 2018 UTC: Mass deletion of pages added by Unknown contributor123 - copyright violations, re-uploading previously deleted files --Krdbot 18:31, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
low quality Penis image Denniss (talk) 08:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
low quality Penis image Denniss (talk) 08:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
low quality Penis image Denniss (talk) 08:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:36, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
https://www.fc-tm.ru/arkhiv-novostej/item/4610-valerij-nikolaevich-abramov-1951 Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:29, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:39, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
out of scope: poor quality, low educational value in comparison to existing images of giraffe. Abiyoyo (talk) 23:59, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:40, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Errror a la hora de subir. Lockuss (talk) 01:02, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Foto pertenece a Facebook extraida desde https://scontent.felp1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/11813533_1676879099208486_6802301889038526730_n.png?_nc_cat=0&_nc_eui2=AeEQ6EGptUjkYWBqJ8K1MaIjMZO4OMsfPylhRlSajq57cGsIjRB9x6WcFDzBaEAhyJgNL4hI6maJLf_RRRov8-aOvPZvUJ1ofS6e7Q5FvHDABQ&oh=252ca770d2c8b8e2bfdba1b7f210955b&oe=5BC25560 Campylobacter (talk) 04:25, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: courtesy deletion of recent upload. P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:22, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Nonfree YouTube video: https://youtube.com/watch?v=1c1DBkYs-dM Ytoyoda (talk) 02:25, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --whym (talk) 14:42, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope, personal image. Дима Г (talk) 03:30, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Keep Can be used for many purpose as a profile picture and to illustrate a man reading a book, depth of field... Apparently he's also the writer of that book so why not... --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 18:36, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per TwoWings. --whym (talk) 14:40, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Al.trcka as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: blur This is implicitly a COM:SCOPE concern - converted to DR. Эlcobbola talk 21:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep, the object is clearly visible and identifiable in the picture. No other image of identical composition uploaded. --ŠJů (talk) 15:30, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
- Keep, in scope, used. --Ras67 (talk) 20:30, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Эlcobbola talk 20:38, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
A 25 KB file with no clear Metadata. Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · mail) 16:51, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Seem like a cropped version of the image present at this url. --Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · mail) 16:53, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Kept: OK now. --Yann (talk) 16:38, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
Personal photo. Out of scope. Kalbbes (talk) 21:43, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted by Wdwd at 11:42, 5 Juli 2018 UTC: per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Imnadim --Krdbot 18:20, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Personal photo. Out of scope. Kalbbes (talk) 21:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted by Wdwd at 11:42, 5 Juli 2018 UTC: per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Imnadim --Krdbot 18:20, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Unused content, request for deletion by the original uploader of the photo. Gage (talk) 07:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Good pic. Smiles. --E4024 (talk) 15:08, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Textbook scan; author doesn't match uploader's username, so probably a copyright violations. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:00, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:19, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Book scan, possible copyright violation. License given is unlikely, Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:20, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Sourced to TSV Steinbach Ytoyoda (talk) 02:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:20, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Taken in private place, no evidence of consent for publication and use in Wikipedia articles. Дима Г (talk) 02:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep It's been on Flickr for a while and part of this gallery, which isn't clearly a "private performance"... --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 18:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep, per TwoWings. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 17:21, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:22, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Watermark credits someone other than uploader Ytoyoda (talk) 02:29, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:23, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Not sure if own work, Exif has "FBMD", appears to be from Facebook. Дима Г (talk) 03:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:23, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Soccerlove1991 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Not sure if own work, no Exif data/
Дима Г (talk) 03:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:47, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Interface Test (and Paint Program :-)), CSD7 OJJ (talk) 04:10, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:24, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Interface Test (and Paint Program :-)), CSD7 OJJ (talk) 04:11, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:24, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Interface Test (and Paint Program :-)), CSD7 OJJ (talk) 04:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:25, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
A copyrighted picture from a website called opennewser.com Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:25, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
There is no metadata of picture. The description says an old memmory picture. May be a copyright violation of original photographer. Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:24, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:26, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No metadata. The image is a resized one from original Image. This might be a copyright violation of original photographer. Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:27, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No metadata. The image is a resized one from original Image. This might be a copyright violation of original photographer. Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:27, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No metadata. The image is a resized one from original Image. This might be a copyright violation of original photographer. Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:27, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:27, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No metadata. The image is a resized one from original Image. This might be a copyright violation of original photographer. Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:27, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:28, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No metadata. The image is a resized one from original Image. This might be a copyright violation of original photographer. Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:28, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No details in metadata. The image may be resized one from original Image. This might be a copyright violation of original photographer. Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:30, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:28, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No metadata. The image is a resized one from original Image. This might be a copyright violation of original photographer. Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:28, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No metadata. The image is a resized one from original Image. This might be a copyright violation of original photographer. Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:28, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No metadata. The image is a resized one from original Image. This might be a copyright violation of original photographer. Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:32, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:28, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Photograph of a painting. May be a copyright violation of original creator. Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:27, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No metadata. The image might be resized one from original Image. This might be a copyright violation of original photographer. Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:27, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No metadata. The image might be resized one from original Image. This might be a copyright violation of original photographer. Ranjith -- (Ranjithsiji) (talk to me) 05:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:27, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
In Russia a person's consent is required for publication if such image is the principal focus of use (e.g. portrait photograph) and the use of the image is not in the state's, society's or other public interest. Also, the photo may violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 12 which saysː "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation." It is unclear if the subject is even aware that he is being photographed. Дима Г (talk) 06:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:28, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
blank content instead of a chart; no correction has been made within the last 10 months. Archie02 (talk) 06:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
- Deletethe [view-source:https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Apalancamiento_y_Riesgo_de_quiebra_Autlan_%281990-2015%29.svg source-code] contains "nothing" JoKalliauer (talk) 20:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:28, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
It is highly doubtful that the applied crown license applies: It seems very unlikely that this photograph of a German Uboat this close could have been taken by a British Governmental employee. Thus, this work is very likely not created by the United Kingdom Government is not in the public domain. Furthermore, the uploader did not provide any valid evidence and in this book (which I have),that is given as the source, there is no notice that it is of British origin. 188.110.160.131 07:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:29, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Weak license information: Claiming that it is taken by an "unknown bulgarian official" is insufficient. This is no good base to use the PD-US license 188.110.160.131 07:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:29, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
The files are architectural and technical plans protected by copyright owne by the architect. Given that the plans where copied from ArchDaily, it's most possible that the uploaer has neither the copyrights nor the licence from the creator to upload the plans under cc-by-sa
- File:Sancaklar Mosque site plan.jpg
- File:Sancaklar-Mosque-by-Emre-Arolat-Architects dezeen 3 1000.gif
—Ah3kal (Talk) 07:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:30, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Shizhao as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://www.flickr.com/photos/40927764@N05/3770895913/
Converted by me to DR to allow for discussion. Image was uploaded to :en in July 2006. Hit on Flickr says "Shot in January 2004", but does not state when it was uploaded to Flickr. However, the Flickr account started only in 2009[5]. So, it's more likely the Flickr-user has stolen this image from Commons than the other way round, IMO. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:23, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Flickr Upload date July 30 2009 --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:31, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
As stated, copied from https://www.archdaily.com/516205/sancaklar-mosque-emre-arolat-architects/539a9db0c07a803df40007e5-sancaklar-mosque-emre-arolat-architects-photo No indication that the photographer released it under cc-by-sa (Creator: © Thomas Mayer, and as stateed at ArchDaily All images are © each office/photographer mentioned.) —Ah3kal (Talk) 07:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:38, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
I could not see references to this party and flag in English media. w:List of political parties in Greece does not include this party. The flag is not used either. Therefore I believe this is out of scope. E4024 (talk) 08:17, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Part of a hoax article that was deleted in el.wikipedia (cf. el:Συζήτηση:Ισλαμικό Σοσιαλιστικό Εργατικό Κόμμα Ελλάδας). No real value in this picture.—Ah3kal (Talk) 09:02, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- I DR'ed the two images this user uploaded and they have made no effort to defend their files. I do believe they are a user blocked for a month for personal attacks, but of course I cannot prove that. Simply look at their common interests and how this user suddenly "woke up". --E4024 (talk) 15:15, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- This is a indeed a non-existent party, I did not realise it was a hoax and uploaded this image from their website. It should be deleted. Thank you. --Mwadana8009 (talk) 22:34, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:39, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Low-resolution composition of images already in the glycine category. Therefore redundant. GKFXtalk 08:55, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:39, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Low-resolution structural formula with connectivity error: amine is shown as NH₂— not H₂N— as is conventional. GKFXtalk 09:00, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:39, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Low-resolution structural formula with connectivity error: amine is shown as NH₂— not H₂N— as is conventional. GKFXtalk 09:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:39, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Derivative work by a single uploader. E4024 (talk) 09:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:39, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
I believe this looks like Flickrwashing,. Old picture uploaded to Flickr, seems like a scanned photo --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 09:17, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:40, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No indication of age of sculptures (either main statue or base) that would confirm they are PD. Additionally, the photograph has a small filesize and no metadata, making it unlikely to be the work of the uploader. Storkk (talk) 10:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:45, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
The file is an image of Jakarta Tower in Jakarta, Indonesia. As Indonesia has no FOP, and the building's design may exceed COM:TOO, the file may be unfree. 廣九直通車 (talk) 10:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:46, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Screenshot of presumably non-free software, icons and profile images. —LX (talk, contribs) 10:13, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:46, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Imho the file cannot even be "saved" by cropping. In this condition it is not suitable to illustrate the depicted object or the topic. It thus falls out of common's scope. Jotzet (talk) 10:29, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:46, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Songs, album covers and promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:Sirusho-MiToghIndzMenak (Acoustic).ogg
- File:Sirusho-MiToghIndzMenak.ogg
- File:Sirusho MiToghIndzMenak.jpg.png
- File:Sirusho-MiToghIndzMenak.jpg.png
- File:SirushoWhereWereYou.ogg
- File:WhereWereYou.jpg
- File:SirushoWhereWereYou.jpg
- File:SirushoPregomesh.jpg.png
- File:SirushoArmatAlbum.jpg.png
- File:SonaSarkisyan.jpg
- File:By Vigen Mnoyan.jpg
- File:Varduhi.jpg
- File:EssaiAltounian.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:22, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
EugeneZelenko All the materials were sent to me directly via email address by the owners. The materials were went to me directly by the owner.
Deleted: OTRS permission from copyright holder/s is required. --INeverCry 23:07, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
no permissions
Mutter Erde (talk) 07:28, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. copyright holder should confirm licenses via OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 10:27, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Unlikely to be the own work of uploader as claimed: professional-looking portraits and news-style shots from two different cameras uploaded by a user who has had difficulty understanding copyrights before.
File:GasparyanGohar.jpgnot actually claimed as own work, and currently under its own DR. Storkk (talk) 10:32, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Storkk (talk) 10:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- If the files are deleted, please also delete Category:Erna Yuzbashian that I opened. --E4024 (talk) 10:56, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:49, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
This user previously helped User:SHBS with overwriting some files here with copyvios. Sohila55 stopped after one warning. Sadly they didn't learn anything. One album cover (found on Spotify and many other sites), one photo (File:Behnam Safavi - Mojezeh.jpg) that Google images finds in my places (Instagram, shops) and one more low resolution photo without EXIF that I do not believe we can trust this user to be the author of. Probably from social media. COM:PRP, I don't want to try and dig it up.
- Alexis Jazz 22:12, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:21, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
One is a single cover (https://www.amazon.com/Nameye-Eshgh/dp/B071J1KXLT), the other, I'll look it up, but just look at the talk page of this user. They have disappointed me. Even if I don't find it, it'll be deleted per PRP.
- Alexis Jazz ping plz 10:52, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Actually I don't even have to look it up. It looks like a selfie. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 10:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:52, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Aftabuzzaman as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: non-free logo — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 11:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- This file licensed under {{OGL}} & {{CC-BY-SA 4.0}}. But this is wrong. This isn't UK government work. This is a logo of a student political party from Bangladesh which isn't free. --Aftabuzzaman (talk) 17:52, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:53, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Since undoubtedly there are photographs better illustrating the motif in Category:Vault of the Iglesia de San Luis de los Franceses (Sevilla) this inaccurate and corrupted exercise should be obsolete. Jotzet (talk) 11:51, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:53, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted work — Racconish ☎ 12:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:54, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Krishnabala7388 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Logo images of a Malaysian software firm. In my opinion the company doesn't meet our notability criteria and is out of Commons:Project scope
- File:TechBase logo white bg.jpg
- File:Techbase.png
- File:Techbase Solution Sdn.png
- File:Techbase logo1.png
Zaccarias (talk) 12:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:54, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Hannah Arendt on stamps
[edit]Per Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review.
- File:BM-Hannah-Arendt2006.jpg
- File:BM-HannahArendt2006.jpg
- File:DPAG-20061007-HannahArendt.jpg
- File:Stamp Hannah Arendt. Germany 2006.jpg
— Racconish ☎ 12:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:55, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Not own work, false date, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:36, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:56, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Truncated - did not upload in its entirety. Stinglehammer (talk) 12:37, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:56, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Template:Duplicate File:98 Ingram Street, Ramshorn Theatre, Boundary Railings.jpg Sara Thomas (WMUK) (talk) 13:02, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
-2018-05-21T13:02:00.000Z-File:98_Ingram_Street,_Ramshorn_Theatre,_Boundary_Railings_(1).jpg){kind=link}
Kept: Duplicate file already processed, this just a redirect. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:57, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by OABD NEVADA (talk · contribs)
[edit]False "own work" claim. Two artworks - one of them is a book cover, another is even being sold at a commercial gallery [7] - plus a portrait of their author published on a profile at the same gallery [8]. Thus, no evidence that the artist and uploader are the same person to have a right to claim a free license as an "own work" (and even if it would be so for two artworks, the portrait would be by different person).
Tatewaki (talk) 13:38, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:57, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No metadata unlike the other images of buildings by the uploader. Seems like a screengrab from a movie, with the image features played around to look brighter. Also fishy that the other images of actors by the uploader has tags from other websites Jupitus Smart (talk) 13:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:58, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Gaston Ploquin died in 1970. Copyright violation. 90.43.128.157 14:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:58, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Poor quality image, Realistically this won't be used and there's over 70 images which are better quality at Category:Peugeot RCZ, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 14:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 18:58, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by Abdelfatah tifidat (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused, not realistically useful for educational purposes and therefore outside of Commons' project scope. Also: File:مرحبا ح. . و الوعي. . انها من جديد و لا حتى لو كان في .png and File:الا اذا كان هناك من هو كل يوم. .png are copyright violations for failing to attribute Ainali as the author of the original photograph (File:Karolinska institutet aula.jpeg). File:Screenshot 2018.png is also a likely copyright violation as a screenshot of non-free content.
- File:منالبانتالبى أسلحة كيماوية في حفل بهيج و .png
- File:مرحبا ح. . و الوعي. . انها من جديد و لا حتى لو كان في .png
- File:الا اذا كان هناك من هو كل يوم. .png
- File:Screenshot 2018.png
- File:Tifidat photo KALM.jpg
- File:Tifidat photo.jpg
- File:Tifidat in paris .jpg
—LX (talk, contribs) 14:34, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:02, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Metadata shows provenance from Facebook. While it is not impossible that it was taken by the uploader as claimed, this must be verified by following the instructions at OTRS. Storkk (talk) 16:01, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:07, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
This is an image of a non free character. Wikimedia commons says that they will not accept drawings, including cgi art of a non free character. Reportzite (talk) 16:09, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:08, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
(C) All rights reserved at https://www.flickr.com/photos/26201242@N02
Photographer should confirm license via OTRS.
- File:Sunset Moment.jpg
- File:SunStill Shine.jpg
- File:Cloud's Art.jpg
- File:Butterfly Shot.jpg
- File:Butterfly Click.jpg
Storkk (talk) 16:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:08, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
One of the authors, René Hervil, died in 1960. — Racconish ☎ 16:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:08, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Image appears to have been taken from a website (which now doesn't work) - The images look to have been taken by the car manufacturers themselves and not the website provided, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 16:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:09, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Belgian Freedom of Panorama does not appear to cover works inside museums. See notes at COM:FOP#Belgium. Storkk (talk) 16:41, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Also nominating File:Yvonne Serruys.jpg for the same reason. Storkk (talk) 16:43, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:09, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused corporate logo. Formerly in w:Insilico TechServices. See also File:Insilico Logo.jpg. —Cryptic (talk) 17:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:09, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused corporate logo. Formerly in w:Insilico TechServices. See also File:Insilico symbol.jpg. —Cryptic (talk) 17:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:10, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 17:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:10, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Uploaded by blocked sockpuppet: Wikipedia:WP:Sockpuppet_investigations/Pakistanpedia/Archive The Mighty Glen (talk) 17:27, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:10, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Uploaded by blocked sockpuppet: Wikipedia:WP:Sockpuppet_investigations/Pakistanpedia/Archive The Mighty Glen (talk) 17:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:10, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused photo of a person. Formerly in w:Draft:Lingetulu Kannaih Sudhish. Also note file redirect File:Lksudhish.jpg. —Cryptic (talk) 17:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:11, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope as an unused corporate logo. Formerly in w:Giftcart. —Cryptic (talk) 17:35, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:12, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No source, unknown copyright situation. Bogus license. Jcb (talk) 18:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Jcb: I think it was only a coding mistake: corrected, the Autor mentioned in the SVG is umapathyxp@gmail.com , therefore it is likely that Regunathan Umpathy is really the author. (otherwise File:Sri_Lanka_Ampara_District.svg and File:WFP_in_Sri_lanka_Districts.svg should also be questioned) JoKalliauer (talk) 18:44, 21 May 2018 (UTC), (18:53, 21 May 2018 (UTC))
- 'Source = Survey Department' suggests that this is a DW rather than own work, without evidence of permission. Jcb (talk) 18:55, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Delete It might be a copyrightissue. — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 22:32, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
- 'Source = Survey Department' suggests that this is a DW rather than own work, without evidence of permission. Jcb (talk) 18:55, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:13, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
This file is copyrighted by Redbird Flight Simulations. The author was not given permission to upload this file. RedbirdFlight (talk) 18:29, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:13, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Khaled alrimi (talk · contribs)
[edit]Pictures of unidentified people and logo of unnotable company. Out of COM:SCOPE.
--Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 18:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:14, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
unlikely uploaders own work, no exif data, higher resolution & quality online [9] likely lifted from web somewhere BevinKacon (talk) 18:48, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
![[9]](http://www.gslaps.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/kevin-gates-lil-wayne.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:14, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Questionable authorship claims based on the nature of the image (which appears to be a satellite or high-altitute aerial photo). —LX (talk, contribs) 18:57, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:14, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
A claimed author of "US Army" is not bourne out by sourcing to a bare URL hosted at s-nbcnews.com (in contravention of COM:EI). — fourthords | =Λ= | 18:59, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:14, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
DW rather than own work. No source for the base map, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 19:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:14, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Элеонора12411 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Questionable authorship claims based on the low/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent metadata, watermarks, and the uploader's history.
- File:Эш2.jpg – taken with a Canon EOS 6D on 2018-01-14 by "vvrahjdgi" according to the metadata. Watermarked.
- File:Эд4мкм аэро.jpg – no metadata
- File:Эд4мкм.jpg – taken with a Canon EOS 30D on 2012-09-20 by "vvrahjdgi" according to the metadata. Watermarked vvrahjdgi.livejournal.com
- File:Аэ6.jpg – no metadata
—LX (talk, contribs) 19:08, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:15, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Original uploader has long history of uploading copyright violations - this upload has no exif data, has a border, and is upscaled, likely to be another copyright violation BevinKacon (talk) 19:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:15, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Unneeded selfie Bri (talk) 19:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:15, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Unneeded selfie Bri (talk) 19:32, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:15, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
personal image, out of scope, no value BevinKacon (talk) 19:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:15, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
personal image, out of scope, no value BevinKacon (talk) 19:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:15, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
personal image of no value BevinKacon (talk) 19:49, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:16, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. No indication that the author would have died before 1948. Jcb (talk) 20:42, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Если со времени смерти автора, которого установить не удалось, не прошло более 70 лет, то почему должна быть удалена лишь одна эта фотография? Вот, этот же снимок, загруженный другим пользователем с неустановленным автором: File:Грозный главное управление Грознефти проспект Революции.jpg
К тому же данное фото является исходником последнего, так как не обрезано. С уважением --Белан Валерий (talk) 00:05, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- You are correct, that file should be deleted as well. Jcb (talk) 15:03, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:17, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No source. No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Apparently not from PD CIA World Factbook, but from copyrighted World Atlas instead, see here. Jcb (talk) 20:52, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:17, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This is a blurry version of File:Azad Kashmir (My tour 3).jpg. So this blurry version can be deleted. Other than one being blurry, the photos are the same. Kalbbes (talk) 20:53, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:17, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by BevinKacon as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: copyrighted cover [10] — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 20:57, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:17, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
CD cover. Non-free image 212.22.49.215 21:02, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:17, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
No permission from Claudine Caron. Jcb (talk) 21:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:17, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Found at https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/996380994390249473/508UsGbV_400x400.jpg, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:05, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:17, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Similar to http://elegant-entertainment.com/entertainment/wonderboom/, © 2017 Elegant Entertainment Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:08, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Similar to http://elegant-entertainment.com/entertainment/wonderboom/, © 2017 Elegant Entertainment Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:09, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
False date, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:30, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Not below TOO, no permission. Jcb (talk) 21:35, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- It's a common written, I thought it would fit in the case. It can be deleted immediately, of course. My mistake.--Dancrpu (talk) 21:38, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:19, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Non-free content as "own work" Jim1138 (talk) 21:41, 21 May 2018 (UTC) This is our logo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MABIBrands (talk • contribs)
- Doubt that user:MABIBrands is the owner of this logo. It seems doubtful that Mike's Hard Lemonade Co. would want to release this 100 megapixel image with the CC license. Jim1138 (talk) 10:33, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:19, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Wiesław Fijałkowski
[edit]All of the works shown here will be under copyright until January 1, 2071. Their images cannot be kept on Commons without a free license from the artist's heir using OTRS.
- File:Formy-ceramiczne glina-szamotowa-Wieslaw Fijalkowski.jpg
- File:Prace Wiesia na wystawie w Hauteville.jpg
- File:Tanczace formy Wieslaw Fijalkowski.jpg
- File:W.Fijalkowski i jego praca.jpg
- File:W.Fijalkowski.jpg
- File:Wieslaw Fijalkowski d.jpg
- File:Wieslaw Fijalkowski.jpg
- File:Wieslaw-fijalkowski-a-mury-runa-2013-05-13.jpg
. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:20, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
_(1).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(1).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Facebook image, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:27, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
_(1).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:20, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
_(1).jpg){kind=link}
Facebook image, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:27, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Photo from here: https://tealswan.com/gallery/image/1468-2016tealjpg/ Licensed under CC0 1.0 Universal (CC0 1.0) Public Domain Dedication
Deleted: per nomination - FB image is much older. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:27, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Non-free image] MiguelAlanCS (talk) 22:35, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Well, if the picture was uploaded to Commons by the band's bassist... --Kadellar (talk) 15:19, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:28, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
_(40219698104).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(40219698104).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This is a basemap by Getty Images (see EXIF). Is is copyrightable? --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:47, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
_(40219698104).jpg){kind=link}
- Comment - As the uploader, I'll admit to missing the EXIF data, and am inclined to agree with Josve05a. At the very least, it should be simple to recreate from the original and remove any copyright uncertainty. MarginalCost (talk) 13:58, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones (Talk) 19:29, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
_(40219698104).jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by Menara Jakarta (talk · contribs)
[edit]Buildings all look new. No FoP for buildings in Indonesia Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Indonesia
- File:半鸟瞰7白天wxy-hj 10 23gai.jpg
- File:透视3夜景--hh-hj 9 14.jpg
- File:透视黄昏夜景wxy-zgx-10-22 - Copy.jpg
- File:半鸟瞰7白天f-hj 9 30.jpg
- File:R10 Kemayoran 3D MAPS+text ask1.jpg
- File:MJ new.jpg
Ronhjones (Talk) 16:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. Note, however, that files are currently in use. Therefore, if it is possible to move them to the wiki that uses them, it should be done. this file needs to be considered a bit more clearly, because it doesn't appear to be a photograph as others. I don't know what to think of it. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 18:57, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --shizhao (talk) 07:20, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Shizhao as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://www.google.com/search?newwindow=1&tbs=sbi:AMhZZiu0nes9uSd9YZxrwnUfo9e0YLhS_1smVPezP3ALBlw7lQ_1XFxSxRJycJPfoops1yGAgHg6D6bAE9z3AcW_1MoO3UQedAAVRBzX8L4Ew5dsrl6IRl2kfemIyN6jfZU3nVcR551yqPI0IjfzdBxVplEmZxXOR_1XxWTAWnsst5ZuIQOB37TYo5vZyhK2WA8Bb0VFssHiRH7Wd55_1VYW1npdTaY2UyR1DWIa1FEbOERTfCTcw--e61JWtfhTPsOX05hX7-SdhLEMeoHawMvoPNYo_1IhYYQJstDvniVs0UZ7YXwFApZCqUThWqPw_1OgmxvrRzguMEShczYo1ac5BwgsPY-2P6t7hn70A,cdr:1,cd_max:2012&ei=lyMCW8CDAuqJ0gLao5sQ&start=10&sa=N&biw=1600&bih=786
Converted by me to DR to allow for discussion. Of the external hits, shown by Google-images, none is from 2012, the year when this image was uploaded to Commons. The earliest hit in Malaysian Times, which uses the image a lot, is from June 2013.[11] The earliest hit ever, as shown by Google, is a blog entry from 2011[12], which does, however, actually not show this image. So, though the uploader has a history, in this case the evidence is weak, IMO. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:41, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
![[11]](http://www.themalaysiantimes.com.my/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Dewan-rakyat-ditangguh.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete Here there is an image that seems to be the same (same people, same angle, same postures), but in way larger resolution [13], I think this is enough evidence to reasonably believe that the uploader didn't have access to the original file and copied a smaller version from the internet.—Ah3kal (Talk) 09:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Delete much more probable to be copyvio per Ah3kal. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 16:45, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
![[13]](http://www.ideselangor.org/v2/images/Artikel2.PNG){kind=link}
Deleted: per above. --Sealle (talk) 15:24, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Il ne s'agit pas du papillon Papilio thersites ! Gzzz zz 21:24, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep: If the specimen is mis-identified, rename the image and label it as such - it's still a useful image. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:50, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep: Yes, there is no need to delete it; we can probably find the correct identification if the author gives us the location. --LamBoet (talk) 17:14, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep and meanwhile move it into Category:Unidentified Papilio. --Salix (talk) 21:41, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep: please Id as in museum specimen probably via Paul Smart (BOW}.I will ask for the location data but please remember location is not a taxonomic character.It may be mis-identified but I doubt it.What is the suggested id?.Notafly (talk) 18:17, 7 June 2018 (UTC) (the uploader)
- The suggested ID is Papilio palamedes Drury, 1773. All in all, I would maintain this suggestion regardless of the location: it doesn't seem like this species can be mistaken for another one.--LamBoet (talk) 19:02, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
You are absolutely correct LamBoet and Gzzz The specimen is Papilio palamedes Drury, 1773 (error arose due to Smarts note thersites (type of Papilio palamedes Fabricius, 1775 [nec Drury]). I will request that the file is renamed. Thanks everyone Notafly (talk) 12:40, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Kept. ID corrected; consensus for keeping. LamBoet (talk) 13:43, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Uploader has twice uploaded copyvios of this subject. Likely that this image is a copyvio as well. Paul_012 (talk) 14:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
WithoonS: Confirm, it is my own photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WithoonS (talk • contribs) 02:47, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Note: I've added File:MobileBNK48-29May2018.jpg to the discussion. --Paul_012 (talk) 18:53, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
- WithoonS: It is my own photo, confirm 100% — Preceding unsigned comment added by WithoonS (talk • contribs) 08:46, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Majora (talk) 18:41, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
il file è un duplicato dello stesso nominato "_1" e l'immagine (nella versione vecchia) contiene la targa di un autoveicolo parzialmente in vista (dato sensibile) Djpapes84 (talk) 16:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: Already dealt with by Túrelio. --Majora (talk) 18:43, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
il file è un duplicato dello stesso nominato "_1" e l'immagine (nella versione vecchia) contiene la targa di un autoveicolo parzialmente in vista (dato sensibile) Djpapes84 (talk) 16:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: Already dealt with by Túrelio. --Majora (talk) 18:43, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope. Company doesn't meet our notabilitiy criteria.
This file was initially tagged by Zaccarias as no permission (No permission since) Zaccarias (talk) 18:21, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Please reconsider. Would like to create a company page.
Deleted: per nomination. --Majora (talk) 18:45, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
- Restored: as per UDR: ticket:2018060210000317. Yann (talk) 12:27, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
This is a scan of a magazine or some other publication. Flcikrwashing. Possibly PD? --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 09:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Delete 1930 film showing in UK cinema. Not old enough to assume PD. Ronhjones (Talk) 18:44, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Not PD yet. When would it come out of copyright? ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 18:11, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. If a date is figured out please add the "Undelete in" category to this DR. --Majora (talk) 02:56, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This picture was uploaded by me. I have took and uploaded a better picture of the plane, now, so this one is redundant. GeXeS (talk) 18:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete Uploader request. @GeXes: I would like to point out that there is a way to do this without DR, you could have uploaded the new file over the old one via "Upload a new version of this file" link on the bottom of the page; it is a bad idea to do so for files of other people, but this is a file of your own. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 04:08, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Gone Postal: Ah, I see. Never thought about that function in this way. Thank you for the enlightment :o) --GeXeS (talk) 06:02, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Majora (talk) 02:57, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Werbung auf dem Bild Jbergner (talk) 11:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep No advertising is depicted in the image. If the image itself is advertising that has been freely licenced, then it should be appropriately categorised. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 18:39, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: we need a written permission to publish the image. For all we know, it is a copyvio. An OTRS authorisation needed from the author. Ruthven (msg) 07:37, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
Werbung auf dem Bild Jbergner (talk) 11:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep No advertising is depicted in the image. If the image itself is advertising that has been freely licenced, then it should be appropriately categorised. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 18:39, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: we need a written permission to publish the image. For all we know, it is a copyvio. An OTRS authorisation needed from the author. Ruthven (msg) 07:37, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
"A flag depicting the moon above the ocean." Personal file, out of scope. No real educational value. E4024 (talk) 15:16, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- This flag demonstrates a use of the crescent symbol in a non-political and non-religious way, thus I believe it has an educational value. The fact that it is not the official flag of any entity is not enough to have the file deleted. Numerous examples of non-official user-created flags exist in Wikimedia, for example:
[[14]] [[15]] [[16]] [[17]] And these are just a few examples. For the aforementioned reasons, I strongly believe that the file should not be deleted. Thank you. --Mwadana8009 (talk) 22:39, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
![[14]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Earthheart_square.jpg){kind=link}
![[15]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Earth_Flag_Alt-0.svg){kind=link}
![[16]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Earth_flag_gh.png){kind=link}
![[17]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Earth_Flag_Alt-2.svg){kind=link}
- It has no educational use, like its similars it is only used in galleries of similar baseless flags. That is not education at all. --E4024 (talk) 13:09, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Many things are used together (i.e. in galleries) of similar things. That is why they are used together, it cannot be used as a reason for deletion. It is educational in the sense that it shows some principle or demonstrates something. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 18:45, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Kept: in use. Ruthven (msg) 07:38, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
No source. No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 17:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Ottoman era pic. The railway was destroyed during the Great War (1914-18). Due to alphabet change and wake of the Ottoman Empire too difficult to find original appearance, but certainly a pre-1923 item. --E4024 (talk) 06:03, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Looks like it is safe enough to assume public domain due to its age. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 03:45, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion (probably a 1908 photo, given the content of the source article). Ruthven (msg) 07:42, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
No source. No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 17:35, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep This file has been drawn for the french fr:projet:blason with standard elements created under free licehnse by users of this project. Kathisma (talk) 12:44, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
- These elements are not sourced, which is mandatory. Jcb (talk) 15:49, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, They are. Kathisma (talk) 22:27, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
- These elements are not sourced, which is mandatory. Jcb (talk) 15:49, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep It appears that all the issues were now resolved. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 04:03, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion: author is Syryatsu from Projet Blasons. Ruthven (msg) 07:43, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope. Company doesn't meet our notabilitiy criteria.
This file was initially tagged by Zaccarias as no permission (No permission since) Zaccarias (talk) 18:21, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Please reconsider. Would like to create a company page.
- Keep I have no opinion about notability argument. My vote is based upon the fact that even if it were "A picture of random business office building in Florida.jpeg" it would be a good image to have. We have images of non-notable book stores and other businesses. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 04:12, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per Gone Postal. Ruthven (msg) 07:44, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
No information on the photographer, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 17:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- It's unlikely that original uploader is the photographer, low resolution and no exif. Also, the original upload log says: "Bildquelle Technisches Museum Wien" (Bildquelle = source of the image), which strongly suggests that the uploader took it from some website. Jcb (talk) 14:44, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
- Weak delete Ok, I stand corrected, you appear to be right. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 01:13, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
- It's unlikely that original uploader is the photographer, low resolution and no exif. Also, the original upload log says: "Bildquelle Technisches Museum Wien" (Bildquelle = source of the image), which strongly suggests that the uploader took it from some website. Jcb (talk) 14:44, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Majora (talk) 01:27, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
CC-BY-SA 1.0 has never been an option on Flickr. Now the image has been deleted from Flickr. Yet, a license review has seen it fit to approve the license despite this discrepancy. The bot tried to review it before the license reviewer failed to find the image with this specific hash/size at the link provided. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 21:32, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Licence review process is here for specifically this reason, so that each time an image is deleted somewhere else we do not lose the ability to determine if it were really distributed by that licence. Whether or not there were a standard option on Flickr to distribute an image under some licence is irrelevant, an original photographer has the right to distribute under a different licence (even proprietary) and then (for example) in comments state that it is possible to distribute under another free licence. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 04:17, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Kept: Verified by @СССР: , and uploaded with CC BY-SA license (without the version). A case very similar to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Petit Palais 02.jpg. Ruthven (msg) 04:24, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
CC-BY-SA 1.0 has never been an option on Flickr. Now the image has been deleted from Flickr. Yet, a license review has seen it fit to approve the license despite this discrepancy. The bot tried to review it before the license reviewer, but failed to find the image with this specific hash/size (size_not_found) at the link provided. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 21:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Licence review process is here for specifically this reason, so that each time an image is deleted somewhere else or licenced differenly we do not lose the ability to determine if it were really distributed by that licence. Whether or not there were a standard option on Flickr to distribute an image under some licence is irrelevant, an original photographer has the right to distribute under a different licence (even proprietary) and then (for example) in comments state that it is possible to distribute under another free licence. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 04:20, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Kept: similar to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Petit Palais 02.jpg. CC BY SA license was definitely on a CC BY SA 2.0 license on flickr at that time. Ruthven (msg) 04:12, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
CC-BY-SA 1.0 has never been an option on Flickr. Now the image has been deleted from Flickr. Yet, a license review has seen it fit to approve the license despite this discrepancy. The bot tried to review it before the license reviewer failed to find the image with this specific hash/size at the link provided. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 21:45, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Licence review process is here for specifically this reason, so that each time an image is deleted somewhere else or licenced differenly we do not lose the ability to determine if it were really distributed by that licence. Whether or not there were a standard option on Flickr to distribute an image under some licence is irrelevant, an original photographer has the right to distribute under a different licence (even proprietary) and then (for example) in comments state that it is possible to distribute under another free licence. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 04:19, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Comment: On Flickr, the license is always cc by sa 2.0 . When I passed this image on a CC BY SA license, it was definitely on a CC BY SA 2.0 license on flickr---as I don't make mistakes with flickr licenses Jonatan Svensson Glad . I always check the license before I pass an image. Perhaps the license can just be changed to cc by sa 2.0 and kept unless there is a FOP problem? Just a suggestion. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:47, 11 July 2018 (UTC)- Keep From the evidence of these other images from the now deleted flickr account owners account on Commons, his images were licensed as CC BY SA 2.0 The flickrbot passed Marcel's other images. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:56, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ruthven (msg) 04:09, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
CC-BY-SA 2.5 has never been an option on Flickr. Now the image has been deleted from Flickr. Yet, a license review has seen it fit to approve the license despite this discrepancy. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Licence review process is here for specifically this reason, so that each time an image is deleted somewhere else or licenced differenly we do not lose the ability to determine if it were really distributed by that licence. Whether or not there were a standard option on Flickr to distribute an image under some licence is irrelevant, an original photographer has the right to distribute under a different licence (even proprietary) and then (for example) in comments state that it is possible to distribute under another free licence. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 04:19, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2009-08#Images_by_User:Mac9_failed_Flickreview. Ruthven (msg) 04:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
CC-BY-SA 2.5 has never been an option on Flickr. Now the image is licensed under an unfree license on Flickr. Yet, a license review has seen it fit to approve the license despite this discrepancy. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 22:09, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Licence review process is here for specifically this reason, so that each time an image is deleted somewhere else or licenced differenly we do not lose the ability to determine if it were really distributed by that licence. Whether or not there were a standard option on Flickr to distribute an image under some licence is irrelevant, an original photographer has the right to distribute under a different licence (even proprietary) and then (for example) in comments state that it is possible to distribute under another free licence. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 04:18, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per Commons:Undeletion_requests/Archive/2009-08#Images_by_User:Mac9_failed_Flickreview. Ruthven (msg) 04:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
The file is from here, this pic 2003:DE:3EB:DA7:F010:D74F:C28E:858A 19:49, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
- Artnet is not the source of the image. To cite Wikimedia policy, PD-Art defines copyrighted 3D exceptions as "virtue of a choice of viewpoints and lighting arrangements. Anything that could cast a shadow is excluded" whereas this image lacks the definitive shadows or unique lighting arrangements. It is therefore in compliance with Wikimedia's policies regarding art. The purpose of 3D images being disallowed was that an artist has the potential to create a unique arrangement of lighting, and for that reason the policy reads exactly "Anything that could cast a shadow is excluded." There are no shadows in this image. There are no unique arrangements of lighting, camera angles, or anything else that would exclude this image from the policy. I'm fully open to your rationale for why it should be deleted if you have a policy-based counterargument to what I've said, but linking an article that uses the same image is not itself a viable counterargument. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 00:56, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Kept: After much consideration, I’m of the opinion that the overriding factor is that the object is very, very old and that the photo is solely of the object (which is barely more than an inch wide). PD-Art does not apply here but PD-old-100-1923 does. Green Giant (talk) 23:01, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
This image is NOT in the public domain. It is the property of the Department of Classics of the University of Cincinnati. It was taken from a web site that had posted it with permission of the Department of Classics of the University of Cincinnati. The age of the object is irrelevant under copyright law. This image is a photograph under altered light taken under a legal permit granted to the Department of Classics of the University of Cincinnati through the auspices of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Furthermore, the Greek Ministry of Culture retains rights to images of all antiquities in Greece, except as granted by them to an archaeological expedition, in this case the Department of Classics of the University of Cincinnati. The photograph was taken in July 2017. As the appropriate representative of the Department of Classics of the University of Cincinnati we have no objection to the image remaining on Wikipedia if it is noted that it is being used courtesy of the Department of Classics of the University of Cincinnati and that any further reproduction is not permitted. Jack L. Davis Professor University of Cincinnati 129.137.24.5 09:58, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Delete, regretfully: as a derivative of a 3-D artwork, the photo has its own copyright, and we can’t host material that’s not free for others to reproduce. It would probably be OK on enWP with an appropriate FUR.—Odysseus1479 (talk)
- Keep Per the reason why Green Giant kept the image after the first nomination: PD-Old applies here: the photo is solely of the object, and the object is over 100 years old (in fact, it's over three thousand years old). Despite being 3D, PD-Old applies to other 3D works as well. To name several examples: File:"Asiatic Plants" Plate, mid-19th century (CH 18693389).jpg - photo isn't over 100 years old or released to public domain, but the photo is solely of something that is well over 100 years old. The same is true for File:"Assyrian Head" pattern Server, 1885–86 (CH 18650225).jpg as well as File:"Cockfight chair" Reading Chair, ca. 1720–30 (CH 18431709-2).jpg File:"Corsica" Plate, mid-19th century (CH 18693369).jpg. Cheers. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 13:50, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- Additional comment: As for "we have no objection to the image remaining on Wikipedia if it is noted that it is being used courtesy of the Department of Classics of the University of Cincinnati and that any further reproduction is not permitted" I would like to mention that you also have the ability to add this to the file page, but we'd unfortunately need more confirmation that this statement is in fact coming from a representative of the Department of Classics. With all of this in mind, per the Wikimedia Commons policy PD-Old this image is to be kept. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 14:08, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Additional comment: Copyright law is clear in this matter. It is the photograph that is copyrighted, not the object. The photograph is an altered light image of the object, produced by a photographer working in the employ of the Department of the Classics of the University of Cincinnati, and initially published in the academic journal Hesperia, part 4 for 2017. In addition, Greek law requires separate permission from the Greek Ministry of Culture and Sports for the reproduction of an image of an object in a Greek museum. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 94.66.221.231 (talk) 04:18, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
- I appreciate your reply; I will try to address each part of this response based on the guidelines of the Wikimedia Commons -
- "Copyright law is clear in this matter. It is the photograph that is copyrighted, not the object."
- I ask to what degree will this be a factor on Wikimedia Commons in compliance with the policy PD-OLD? "Asiatic_Plants"_Plate,_mid-19th_century_(CH_18693389).jpg is only seventeen years old, but the photo shows only the object and nothing more than a solid color background and how the lighting interacts with the object to cast a small shadow. That means this image is solely of an object with no known copyright in at least the last century.
- "The photograph is an altered light image of the object, ..."
- In what way was the light altered? This image would, if copyrighted, not be allowed on Wikimedia Commons because it can very easily be subject to the artist's creative decisions; the image is not exclusively of the object, which means the surrounding lighting and camera angles can transform the scene in an expressive way. However, this image is allowed based on the PD-Art policy because it's exclusively an image of the work of art with only enough lighting to see the work of art. Lastly, this image uses the policy PD-Old rather than PD-Art because the subject of the photo is not the picture itself, but rather the horse and its rider. I would argue the photograph of the Pylos Combat Agate photograph falls under this because the image is exclusively of the Pylos Combat Agate with no background, and the reflective light shown is a product of the polished agate material more than the creative and expressive decisions of its photographer.
- "... produced by a photographer working in the employ of the Department of the Classics of the University of Cincinnati ..."
- The photographer's name and affiliation with the University of Cincinnati is already included, and has been long before this deletion nomination. If it is preferred, we can add that he is affiliated with the Department of Classics as well, but the Department of Classics remains part of the University of Cincinnati which is already credited.
- "... and initially published in the academic journal Hesperia, part 4 for 2017."
- This doesn't seem to be related to copyright, but if it is requested this detail can be mentioned.
- "In addition, Greek law requires separate permission from the Greek Ministry of Culture and Sports for the reproduction of an image of an object in a Greek museum."
- This leads to a very important question: is the Pylos Combat Agate currently located in a Greek museum? No published sources that we know of have said this yet. Both the article text and this image's copyright information would need to account for this, but we'd first need a reliable secondary source confirming this.
- Lastly, I must reiterate the text of the initial nomination -
- "As the appropriate representative of the Department of Classics of the University of Cincinnati we have no objection to the image remaining on Wikipedia if it is noted that it is being used courtesy of the Department of Classics of the University of Cincinnati and that any further reproduction is not permitted"
- The University of Cincinnati has already been credited, but we cannot state that we were contacted by its representatives without confirmation from the Department of Classics such as a publicly visible statement on its domain regarding what permissions are and not granted, as any individual without an account has the ability to state this.
- Cheers,
- BrendonTheWizard (talk) 23:35, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- After reading en:Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. I can no longer vote delete. But unfortunately now I am significantly confused. I believe that in this case we do need the Foundation's lawyers' opinion or something similar. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 19:14, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
I cannot accurately state how creative the process was or was not, but I would like to emphasize that the nominator suggested that he is not opposed to deletion under the condition that it is attributed to the University of Cincinatti, which it always was. However, there is currently no way of knowing whether or not the nominator is in fact a representative of the University of Cincinatti at the moment, and it would be greatly appreciated if a statement coming from the Department of Classics regarding the permissions they grant is made available. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 12:29, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
I can specify how creative this image is with reference to a statement on the Department of Classics of the University of Cincinnati's domain. See https://classics.uc.edu/index.php/news/276-one-of-the-greatest-masterpieces-of-aegean-art and please read the final paragraph. We hope this satisfies Brendan the Wizard's reservations as to whether or not my views are those of the Department of Classics of the University of Cincinnati. If this image is to stay in Wikipedia, then Brendan the Wizard need only follow the instructions at the link provided in order to obtain permission. It will be necessary to indicate further that the image is not in the public domain. Jack L. Davis Head, Department of Classics, University of Cincinnati — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 94.66.221.231 (talk) 05:15, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
- That is great, thank you! I will send a request for permissions to the email provided in that statement. I have modified the copyright information displayed on the Wikimedia Commons page to account for the information described on the University of Cincinati's domain. If any further changes are necessary, please let me know. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 12:00, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
Comment to copyright clerks or other third parties I have received a reply from the University of Cincinnati Department of Classics offering that I am granted permission to reproduce the image to the Wikimedia Commons without releasing the image into the public domain. Is this acceptable on the Wikimedia Commons? The Department of Classics agrees to let the image be used on Wikimedia, but not to release it completely. While we would have explicit permission to use it, it is unclear if that is sufficient. If this would be accepted, please immediately contact me so I can reply to the Department of Classics. If it is not possible to use the file with explicit permissions while allowing the Department of Classics to retain ownership of the image, then regretfully we will not be able to use it in the article. I am honestly not certain whether or not this would be allowed, as it would neither be using the file without permission from the owner nor using a file released into the public domain, so what happens next is for a third party to decide. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 06:15, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Definitely not acceptable. Wikipedia-only licences are the exact antithesis of what Wikimedia Commons is all about. Any media must be under the free licence to be uploaded here. You may, however, look at the Wikipedias of different languages, some of which allow such licences and upload the image there. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ ✍ ⏿) 07:26, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Very unfortunate. If such a license is allowed on Wikipedias of other languages, we can continue to use the image on those Wikipedias, but until then our only options are to see if the University of Cincinnati is willing to release a public image of the Pylos Combat Agate, otherwise we cannot use it on English Wikipedia. The following Wikipedias use the file currently: ta.wikipedia.org el.wikipedia.org de.wikipedia.org es.wikipedia.org fr.wikipedia.org If any of these Wikipedias accept use with permission, the file can remain on the articles in those languages. For the time being, I have removed it from the English Wikipedia article on the Pylos Combat Agate unless the university would consider releasing a photograph into the public domain. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 23:09, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Please wait until the deletion request is closed by an admin, before removing images from articles. Green Giant (talk) 23:42, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Very unfortunate. If such a license is allowed on Wikipedias of other languages, we can continue to use the image on those Wikipedias, but until then our only options are to see if the University of Cincinnati is willing to release a public image of the Pylos Combat Agate, otherwise we cannot use it on English Wikipedia. The following Wikipedias use the file currently: ta.wikipedia.org el.wikipedia.org de.wikipedia.org es.wikipedia.org fr.wikipedia.org If any of these Wikipedias accept use with permission, the file can remain on the articles in those languages. For the time being, I have removed it from the English Wikipedia article on the Pylos Combat Agate unless the university would consider releasing a photograph into the public domain. BrendonTheWizard (talk) 23:09, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. As per the university's website, the object is curved and special photographic techniques were used to take the picture. Therefore this is NOT a 2D object, "Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp." does NOT apply, and new copyright is established for this photo. The university has NOT released it with a license compatible for Commons. A copy can be uploaded to en.wp as fair use. P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:37, 16 October 2018 (UTC)