Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2018/08/14
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
Falsches Lemma, sollte Category werden / ist neu als Kategorie vorhanden / bitte löschen. Ἀστερίσκος (talk) 12:14, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 20:50, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Vysotsky as duplicate (duplicate) and the most recent rationale was: Feyenoord tegen Ajax 1-5, eerste doelpunt van Ajax, rechts Cruijff juichend, Bestanddeelnr 925-5297.jpg Vysotsky (talk) 23:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Delete Duplicate with higher res. file. Vysotsky (talk) 23:31, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: speedy-deleted as dupe. -- User: Perhelion 00:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
No source. No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 20:19, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- It had {{self|cc-zero}} before. Now it has also explicit source and authorship information. I hadn't added them before because of my technical infrastructure forcing me to upload from mobile. Sorry for the bad file information! --Marsupium (talk) 09:03, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks! Jcb (talk) 14:35, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: resolved. --Jcb (talk) 14:35, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Tiven2240 as duplicate (duplicate) and the most recent rationale was: General Marcellin Marbot.png -- User: Perhelion 22:58, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. -- User: Perhelion 13:53, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Very poor quality, orphaned/replaced. Leyo 09:39, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Suggestion: If quality is poor, (I live in a poor region, I don't have resources), the file must be bettered and not deleted. Unfortunately some people DO NOT contribute with Wikipedia. What a pity!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claudio Pistilli (talk • contribs)
- My friend, the file was bettered and substituted. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claudio Pistilli (talk • contribs)
- I uploaded a new version that is consistent with MOS. Especially, I used a consistent font, size etc. --Leyo 22:20, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- My friend, the file was bettered and substituted. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claudio Pistilli (talk • contribs)
Kept: Withdrawn. --Leyo 22:21, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Accidentally created DR withdrawn (file for testing) Jotzet (talk) 16:43, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: A DR for A DR??. --JuTa 01:12, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Bogus copyright tag. The author is w:Kim Won-gyun, who died in 2002, less than 50 years ago. Stefan2 (talk) 20:54, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Finnusertop (talk) 23:04, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
own request Jeromi Mikhael (talk) 07:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 08:59, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
The exif credits Christian Charisius Ytoyoda (talk) 00:18, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Please provide permission to COM:OTRS. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:36, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
unblanked digit version exists, so unnecessary Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 00:40, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Comment The uncensored version is File:Targa automobilistica Italia 1994 AX•700 ZZ.jpg. --bjh21 (talk) 10:43, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncensored version exists File:Targa automobilistica Italia 1994 AX•700 ZZ.jpg. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:38, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
France has no COM:FOP for modern buildings. Leoboudv (talk) 01:08, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not a specialist, but if I read well, "Works without a particular or original character, which are a trivial reproduction of building types largely found across the country, are not protected." [1] may apply here. पाटलिपुत्र (talk) 05:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: The building is at the background, not the main subject of this picture as mostly hidden by trees. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:45, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
France has no COM:FOP for modern buildings. Leoboudv (talk) 01:09, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not a specialist, but if I read well, "Works without a particular or original character, which are a trivial reproduction of building types largely found across the country, are not protected." [2] may apply here. पाटलिपुत्र (talk) 05:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: The building is at the background, not the main subject of this picture as mostly hidden by trees. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:46, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
This is a screenshot from a Flickr video. Why do you upload this? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 01:31, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Alexis Jazz: It was part of a batch upload using Flickr2Commons, which only shows thumbnails and doesn't state the file size before uploading. I briefly inspect the list to weed out files that aren't in scope, but it's not always obvious. For those that get through, I usually catch them before anyone else comes across them (recent examples: 1, 2, 3, 4). Flickr2Commons has a few other problems, but it's still the most convenient tool for uploading images from Flickr. Mindmatrix 12:43, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Poor quality, likely out of scope. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:48, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
This is not Timothy Bloodworth.
According to an edit here:
I noticed that there is a portrait allegedly of Timothy Bloodworth linked on this page. This is not a portrait of Timothy Bloodworth. It is a portrait of Willie Jones. The Bloodworth portrait comes from a website honouring educators who made a difference in the world; that site does not cite the image. The Willie Jones article links northcarolinahistory.org, who in turn cite University of North Carolina Chapel Hill Libraries for the source of the portrait. The portrait also visually looks like another portrait of Willie Jones in that article. Every other copy of the image attributing it to Bloodworth online cites either Wikipedia or does not offer a citation and dates after the image was put on Wikipedia. The US Senate Historical Office says Timothy Bloodworth does not have a known portrait, image, or depiction -- one of a small number of senators that does not have one. So overall I would say there is virtually no evidence this is an image of Timothy Bloodworth and stronger evidence it is not.
Unfortunately I can't seem to wrap my head around the table syntax for this page to make the edit myself. I already removed the image from the Timothy Bloodworth page on Wiki proper. 128.97.227.126 (talk) 23:52, 13 August 2018 (UTC) —GoldRingChip (please reply on wp) 01:51, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Image shows Willy Jones, it can be deleted as duplicate. --Migebert (talk) 13:30, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Image is tagged as "Photo-PTI" at the source web page, indicating that it is an agency photo from w:Press Trust of India. GODL-India is not applicable here as it is not an image taken by Rajya Sabha TV. Gazoth (talk) 19:02, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete — I should’ve done my due diligence on this, not foolishly assumed that the image would’ve been taken by RSTV, for that I am sorry. SshibumXZ (talk) 19:04, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:34, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
The author's death is unknown. Will be uploaded to Wikipedia instead. HERCVLES (talk) 19:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. See Commons:Anonymous works. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:33, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
As an original uploader I want this to be deleted, because it's blurred. Kulmalukko (talk) 19:44, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: Courtesy deletion. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:31, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Contemporary (2012 or later) sculpture in Moscow, Russia - no freedom of panorama. Retired electrician (talk) 19:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:28, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
No permission indicated in source URL. Dubious if this is self-portrait. Papuass (talk) 20:46, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Unlikely to be a selfie. Please provide permission to COM:OTRS. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:27, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Facebook image, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:50, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Reply. This picture was downloaded from a facebook profile but it belongs to me and was being used by the person on his Facebook account. There is no reason it should be deleted Zaydbinumar (talk) 21:59, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Zaydbinumar: Yes there's a reason : Facebook images are not free of use. Besides copyright holder is almost always the photographer and not the person pictured. So the photographer must send a permission via COM:OTRS or the owner of the Facebook accound should modify the description of this picture by making it available under a Creative Commons license. Yours, --Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:09, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Please provide permission to COM:OTRS. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:27, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
too unclear Rudolphous (talk) 21:01, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: Poor quality. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:25, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Self-promotion. Out of scope Fixertool (talk) 21:23, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: Beyond Commons:Threshold_of_originality. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:25, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Self-promotion via logo. See User talk:Danielmesaltc Fixertool (talk) 21:24, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: Can be used as icon (under PD because of simple shapes used). --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:24, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Vanity. Self-promotion. Out of scope by SPA Fixertool (talk) 21:25, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:22, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Facebook image, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:22, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#France Ronhjones (Talk) 21:31, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: Under Public Domain because Maillol died in 1944. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:21, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#France Ronhjones (Talk) 21:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: Under Public Domain because Maillol died in 1944. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:21, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Facebook image, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:52, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:05, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Facebook image, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:58, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:07, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
© Red Button 2016, https://www.rba.cz/produkty/rbeleader Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:24, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:09, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope. SPA Fixertool (talk) 23:03, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:09, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo-album. Fixertool (talk) 23:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:10, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo-album. Fixertool (talk) 23:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:10, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo-album. Fixertool (talk) 23:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:11, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo-album. Fixertool (talk) 23:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:13, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo-album. Fixertool (talk) 23:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:14, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Vanity. Self-promotion. Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo-album. Fixertool (talk) 23:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:14, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Non notable person. Outside project scope. Mark Marathon (talk) 23:24, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: Used on Meta. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:15, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Non notable individual. Oustdie project scope. Mark Marathon (talk) 23:37, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: Used on a personal page. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:17, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Non notable individual. Oustdie project scope. Mark Marathon (talk) 23:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:18, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Non notable individual. Oustdie project scope. Mark Marathon (talk) 23:40, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: Used on se.wikimedia.org. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:19, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Image from a shopgoodwill.com sale item: http://sgws3productimages.azureedge.net/sgwproductimages/images/108/5-1-2018/1571618183433in.JPG Ytoyoda (talk) 12:50, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete – Redcommrade didn’t upload a single own work here. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 13:43, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 13:27, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Taken from another wiki, license unclear: https://www52.atwiki.jp/petri/pages/145.html Ytoyoda (talk) 12:52, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete – Redcommrade didn’t upload a single own work here. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 13:44, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 13:28, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Unused screenshots images unlikely to be used at th.wikipedia.org since the user is blocked there.
- File:ฐิฏา รังสิตพล มานิตกุล - ผู้พันปราง.jpg
- File:ผู้พันปราง.jpg
- File:พันโทหญิงฐิฏา รังสิตพล มานิตกุล - ผู้พันปราง.jpg
- File:Professor Doctor Thitiporn Rangsitpol Suwatanapongched,Sukavich Rangsitpol ‘s Daughter.jpg
Keep This picture is on Flickr under Public Domain https://www.flickr.com/photos/148083379@N08/43103520695/in/dateposted-public/ It was reviewed on 2018-08-13 10:30:49 by FlickreviewR 2. --Call of the Nightowl (talk) 23:27, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- This file is a copyvio of 59.8MB http://iwpfi2017.org/download/program-book.pdf (just below the middle of page 12, row 3, column 3). — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:11, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
- File:Lieutenant Colonel Thita Rangsitpol Manitkul.png
- File:Sukavich Rangsitpol & Thita Rangsitpol Manitkul.png
Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:38, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I was blocked due to political conflict with Administrators .I found the photo of the Politician I like .Because of him millions of children could go to school.It seems that some influential people don’t like them because they contribute to much for the poor.
I would be appreciated if you do not delete my photo and let me contribute. I doubt that with multimillion photo and millions of them is not used. Why ‘s my photo ,I believed some of you thought something is wrong. File:The name of school His Excellency Mr.Sukavich Rangsitpol Ministers of Education founded between 1995and 1997 No.1.png
14 August 2018 File:The name of school His Excellency Mr.Sukavich Rangsitpol Ministers of Education founded between 1995and 1997 No.2.png
User created page with UploadWizard
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%E0%B8%95%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%87%E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%87_%E0%B8%95%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%87%E0%B8%95%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B9%E0%B9%89_%E0%B8%A7%E0%B9%88%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%99%E0%B9%82%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%82%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%87_%E0%B8%AF%E0%B8%9E%E0%B8%93%E0%B8%AF_%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%B8%E0%B8%82%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%8A_%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%B5%E0%B9%81%E0%B8%84%E0%B9%88%E0%B9%84%E0%B8%AB%E0%B8%99_%E0%B9%83%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%95%E0%B9%88%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%87%E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B0%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%97%E0%B8%A8.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sry88 (talk • contribs) 11:17, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
01:19
File:The name of school His Excellency Mr.Sukavich Rangsitpol Ministers of Education founded between 1995and 1997 No.1.png
User created page with UploadWizard
01:19
File:The name of school His Excellency Mr.Sukavich Rangsitpol Ministers of Education founded between 1995and 1997 No.3.png
User created page with UploadWizard
01:19
Pongsak ksm /Interface Administrator /Thai wiki
←Created page with 'Category:Thailand
File:ผลงานทางการเมืองที่ดีต้องเป็นความลับ เรื่องโกหกจะได้น่าเชื่อ คนดีจะได้พ่ายแพ้.png File:ต้องปิดบัง ต้องตัดการรับรู้ ว่านโยบายของ ฯพณฯ สุขวิช ดีแค่ไหน ในต่างประเทศ.png
And now he deleted the fact and edit history page information
Many of us in education profession have noticed the situation that why we are trying to tell the truth
I just found out ,it is very hard to explain no wonder I was blocked
ที่โดนลบhttps://wikivisually.com/wiki/Draft_talk:Sukavich_Rangsitpol
References Edit
^ https://www.linkedin.com/in/thita-rangsitpol-manitkul-6ab77080/ ^ [1][dead link] ^ [2][dead link] ^ http://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/UNDP4/we-content/upload/2013/01/Plenary Highlights APPAN.pdf[dead link] ^ http://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/UNDP4/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Plenary_Highlights_APPAN.pdf
This is why the link dead and then This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page
https://wikivisually.com/wiki/Draft_talk:Sukavich_Rangsitpol — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sry88 (talk • contribs) 03:49, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Set A
Set B
^ http://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/UNDP4/we-content/upload/2013/01/Plenary Highlights APPAN.pdf[dead link] ^ httpu://www.ombudsman.gov.ph/UNDP4/wpcontent/uploads/2013/01/Plenary_Highlights_APPAN.pdf
Draft talk:Sukavich Rangsitpol [show article only] From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia [w] This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. WikiProject icon Biography portal This page is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the projectand contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Draft This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject icon flag Thailand portal This page is within the scope of WikiProject Thailand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Thailand-related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systematic bias group aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Thailand-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Draft This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Blue alert icon. The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of the article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. 22sep (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. (Special:Diff/751488336, Special:Diff/740903529, Special:Diff/751528727, c:Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Panda m.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sry88 (talk • contribs) 10:05, 14 August 2018 (UTC) 15 uploads
ต้องปิดบัง ต้องตัดการรับรู้ ว่านโยบายของ ฯพณฯ สุขวิช ดีแค่ไหน ในต่างประเทศ
ผลงานทางการเมืองที่ดีต้องเป็นความลับ เรื่องโกหกจะได้น่าเชื่อ คนดีจะได้พ่ายแพ้
To tell public about the schools the person found consider Advertising
The Reasons was “ To put the name of the person founded in his Wiki page would consider Advertising?!?
The name of school His Excellency Mr.Sukavich Rangsitpol Ministers of Education founded between 1995and 1997 No.2
The name of school His Excellency Mr.Sukavich Rangsitpol Ministers of Education founded between 1995and 1997 No.1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sry88 (talk • contribs) 11:05, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Unused pictures, COM:OOS.
- File:University of Pittsburgh,ฯพณฯสุขวิช รังสิตพล.png
- File:His Excellency Mr.Sukavich Rangsitpol,Harvard University.png
Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Comment I have blocked Sry88 for three days for persistent disruptive editing, namely cross-posting of undeletion requests for these files that are still being discussed. De728631 (talk) 17:17, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete all in all sections per nom. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Political Peference
[edit]That link is full of unused photo and my photos is used . What is the real reason? Sry88 (talk) 21:56, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- That is just the mobile view of Category:Prang Vejjajiva. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 02:49, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Keep
pseudocode
if license == "Public domain mark":
if no {{License template tag}}: // no license of any kind
add {{Remove this line and insert a public domain copyright tag instead}}{{No license since|month=August|day=19|year=2018}}
review passed
else if no {{PD-Layout}}: // non PD license found
review passed_changed
skip try_license_subst
else: // PD license
review passed
https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_comment/Flickr_and_PD_images — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sry88 (talk • contribs) 15:01, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Wikipedia:NPOVT : All my photos I upload was from Flickr under Public Domain Public domain
Keep
1)This Link to the Unused Photo that is not deleted https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Prang_Vejjajiva
2)But that is not the action to my photos https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Sry88
3) File:Professor Doctor Thitiporn Rangsitpol Suwatanapongched,Sukavich Rangsitpol ‘s Daughter.jpg Symbol keep vote.svg Keep This picture is on Flickr under Public Domain https://www.flickr.com/photos/148083379@N08/43103520695/in/dateposted-public/ It was reviewed on 2018-08-13 10:30:49 by FlickreviewR 2. --Call of the Nightowl (talk) 23:27, 18 August 2018 (UTC) This file is a copyvio of 59.8MB http://iwpfi2017.org/download/program-book.pdf (just below the middle of page 12, row 3, column 3). — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:11, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Both of them are right,the photo was different,the one I upload was from Flickr .I believe the owner of the Flickr account used photoshop or something before upload in Flickr under Public Domain . Public domain ,and the link http://iwpfi2017.org/download/program-book.pdf was under the photo I think the one who vote keep check it out that it was difference .
https://www.facebook.com/100005548114343/posts/896511200543809/
- The other one :
https://www.facebook.com/100005548114343/posts/896510357210560/
4) File:Lieutenant Colonel Thita Rangsitpol Manitkul.png https://www.flickr.com/photos/157145480@N04/41541966735/in/photolist-28TsDzL-29YXWzD-29YXWDB-28EUNZV-28XvxTf-LdWoWr-28Q5qtN-MVviTs-29stmuS-8yhBz3-26hVrpM
- . Uploaded on May 29, 2018
Public domain
Sry88 (talk) 05:08, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: copyright violations. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:15, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope. Screenshots of deleted Wikipedia contributions uploaded by the same long-term sock-farming COI user who wrote the article.
- File:ฯพณฯ สุขวิช รังสิตพล วิกิคำคมภาษาอังกฤษ.jpg
- File:ต้องปิดบัง ต้องตัดการรับรู้ ว่านโยบายของ ฯพณฯ สุขวิช ดีแค่ไหน ในต่างประเทศ.png
- File:ผลงานทางการเมืองที่ดีต้องเป็นความลับ เรื่องโกหกจะได้น่าเชื่อ คนดีจะได้พ่ายแพ้.png
- File:To tell public about the schools the person found consider Advertising.jpg
- File:The Reasons was “ To put the name of the person founded in his Wiki page would consider Advertising?!?.jpg
- File:The name of school His Excellency Mr.Sukavich Rangsitpol Ministers of Education founded between 1995and 1997 No.2.png
- File:The name of school His Excellency Mr.Sukavich Rangsitpol Ministers of Education founded between 1995and 1997 No.1.png
- File:The name of school His Excellency Mr.Sukavich Rangsitpol Ministers of Education founded between 1995and 1997 No.3.png
Paul_012 (talk) 22:52, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --~Moheen (keep talking) 07:22, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Antares7364 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Photos with conflicting EXIF photo credit.
- File:Brice OLLIVIER.jpg
- File:Adrian CRISAN.jpg
- File:Équipe Pro A 2017-2018.jpg
- File:Match de Pro A à la Romagne.jpg
Ytoyoda (talk) 00:11, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: possible copyvio COM:PCP; no permission;. --Wdwd (talk) 08:44, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/hastemplate:"CC-BY" insource:flickr insource:/"reviewlicense=Public Domain Mark"/
[edit]No valid license. Public Domain Mark works erroneously tagged as CC-BY 1.0. That shit is like, old, man.
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853178701).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853180231).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42136005564).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (27985214007).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (27985215297).jpg
- File:Zamboni (42853180521).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42854007711).jpg
- File:Travis Boyd (72) Nathan Walker (49) (42853182441).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853177011).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853180091).jpg
- File:Alex Ovechkin Ted Leonsis (42853178891).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (41952507685).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853179361).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (27984326737).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853177921).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853178601).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (27984323407).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (27984326407).jpg
- File:Alex Ovechkin Ted Leonsis (42853178781).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853179661).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (41952507255).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (27985214287).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (27984324157).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853183051).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853179431).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42136007164).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42854006871).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42901273021).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42136007784).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853177591).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42854008101).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42183051074).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42183051974).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853177361).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (27984323737).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (27984327127).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853177231).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42136006664).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42136008574).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42854007391).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42183049924).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853177551).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (41952505495).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853177701).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (41042266500).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42136006044).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853177811).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (27985214847).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853183681).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42136009664).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42136009134).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42854006561).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853177431).jpg
- File:Washington Capitals Parade (42901272311).jpg
- File:Stanley Cup Parade (42853179181).jpg
- Alexis Jazz ping plz 02:40, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
These images were evidently captured by the Flickr uploader, who identified them as CC-1.0, am I mistaken in believing that would be enough to qualify as CC-BY?SecretName101 (talk) 01:41, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- @SecretName101: yes, you are. Nobody uses CC-1.0 anymore. The Flickr user tagged them with a Public Domain Mark. They may have meant {{Cc-zero}}, but Commons does not accept this. You can contact the Flickr user to change the license from PDM to CC0. Many of these photos are not in scope though, even with a valid license. Some are though, so it may be worth contacting the Flickr user. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 04:17, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- "nobody" uses that license anymore? While newer licenses exist, I am not sure this is true. And CC-BY-1.0 (per creative commons) seems a sufficient indication of CC licensing. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ SecretName101 (talk) 05:02, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Creative commons does not indicate they have retired CC-BY-1.0 https://creativecommons.org/retiredlicenses/ SecretName101 (talk) 05:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- Nobody uses it anymore and Creative Commons recommends using a newer version. It is deprecated and Flickr certainly doesn't use it. Show me anyone who uses CC 1.0 today. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 05:21, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: "public domain mark" (PDM) is not a valid license and not ok here for commons -> missing license. (see Template:Flickr-public domain mark). --Wdwd (talk) 08:51, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Undeleted by Jarekt per Special:PermanentLink/443799320#Accept files published by the copyright holder with a Public Domain Mark on 29 August 2020. -- ZandDev (talk) 11:20, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Image previously published at https://es.rbth.com/cocina/80603-demasiado-bello-para-ser-comido, requires OTRS ticket Ytoyoda (talk) 03:08, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 08:52, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Taken from http://oldmapsofacadianationalpark.blogspot.com/2016/11/maps-of-abandoned-and-lost-trails-in.html Ytoyoda (talk) 03:09, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 08:53, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Small image, no EXIF B dash (talk) 04:11, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio, image from facebook. --Wdwd (talk) 08:54, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Small image, no EXIF B dash (talk) 04:12, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio, image from facebook. --Wdwd (talk) 08:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Small image, no EXIF B dash (talk) 04:12, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP. --Wdwd (talk) 08:55, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Per description and the watermark: Image from 2DF parkour team, may not be own work B dash (talk) 04:22, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP. --Wdwd (talk) 09:36, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Small image, no EXIF data B dash (talk) 04:23, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP. --Wdwd (talk) 09:37, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Thijs van der Heide (talk · contribs)
[edit]Only used on the Dutch Wikipedia, where the subject's article was speedily deleted in November 2017 as spam. Out of project scope.
ℯxplicit 04:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete = Expliciete reclame (explicit advertising) - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 20:32, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:35, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Only used on the Slovak Wikipedia, where the subject's subpage was blanked in January 2018 for spam. Out of project scope. ℯxplicit 05:24, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:35, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
This image illustrates the logotype of http://peterior.kr, appears to be uploaded solely for advertising purpose. IRTC1015 06:03, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:34, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by DroopyDoggy (talk · contribs)
[edit]Likely false authorship claims based on the low resolutions, missing/inconsistent metadata, the nature of the photos, previous publications found elsewhere, and the uploader's history.
- File:Valdo PSG.jpg
- File:Ricardo PSG.jpg
- File:Okocha PSG.jpg
- File:Luis Fernandez player.jpg
- File:Jean-Pierre Dogliani PSG.png
- File:Ginola PSG.jpg
- File:Bernard Lama PSG.jpg
- File:Daniel Hechter PSG.jpg
- File:2017 remontada.jpg
- File:2017 PSG Celtic.jpg
- File:1997 Rai Zidane.jpg
- File:1994 PSG Cote Chaude.jpg
- File:Luis Fernandez manager.jpg
- File:Dominique Bathenay PSG.png
- File:Rai PSG.jpg
- File:Pauleta PSG.jpg
- File:Jean Djorkaeff PSG.jpg
- File:Jean-Marc Pilorget.jpg
- File:Stade Municipal Georges Lefèvre.jpg
- File:1970 PSG first training.png
- File:1970 PSG team.png
- File:1974 Just Fontaine.png
- File:1996 Ngotty.jpg
- File:2015 PSG Quadruple.jpg
- File:2011 Germain the lynx.jpg
- File:2012 Trophée de Paris.jpg
- File:2010 Tournoi de Paris.jpg
- File:1990 Tournoi Indoor de Paris-Bercy.jpg
- File:1989 Tournoi de Paris.png
- File:1989 Tournoi de Paris.jpg
- File:1987 PSG Bercy champions.jpg
- File:1987 Tournoi Indoor de Paris-Bercy.png
- File:PSG home shirts.jpg
- File:PSG logos.jpg
—LX (talk, contribs) 06:13, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP. --Wdwd (talk) 09:33, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 06:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:38, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
sorry this photo was corrupted i uploaded another please delete this Atharvbhs (talk) 06:47, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: Author or uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content. --Wdwd (talk) 09:39, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
this photo was corrupted please delete this photo Atharvbhs (talk) 06:48, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: Author or uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content. --Wdwd (talk) 09:39, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Instant noodles of Korea
[edit]COM:PACKAGING, the main subject in these photos is the packaging; the details are neither minimal nor incidental, and are therefore unacceptable derivative works.
- File:Buldak Bokkeum Myun.jpg
- File:Buldak-bokkeum-tang-myeon.jpg
- File:Haek-buldak-bokkeum-myeon.jpg
- File:Korea Shin Ramyun.jpg
- File:Nongshim Shin Ramyun Black Cup.jpg
- File:Samyang green in Indonesia.jpg
- File:Samyang Ramen Double Spicy.jpg
- File:Shin cup.jpg
- File:Shin Ramyun in France.jpg
- File:Shin Ramyun Red (made in China).jpg
- File:Shin Ramyun.jpg
- File:간짬뽕.gif
- File:도시락 김치맛.jpg
- File:삼양 볶음 간짬뽕.jpg
- File:삼양 불닭 볶음면.jpg
- File:진라면 매운맛.jpg
- File:팔도왕뚜껑.jpg
ℯxplicit 07:04, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Opinions
- About File:Buldak-bokkeum-tang-myeon.jpg, File:Haek-buldak-bokkeum-myeon.jpg and File:Shin Ramyun in France.jpg. I thought very simple, I spend money to buy the product, so that means all the content (external and internal) of the product belongs to my own and I can use them for any purpose. Is not that so? As for the pictures, I took them with my camera (so the uploaded pictures were mine) and uploaded immediately, you can compare the time in the infobox (I'm in France so the time zone in summer is UTC+2) and the upload time on Commons. But if this is still considered as a violation of Commons rules, you can delete them as necessary, without further discussion. Thanks for notice! Kenny htv (talk) 10:05, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:41, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Instant noodles of Korea
[edit]COM:PACKAGING, the main subject in these photos is the packaging; the details are neither minimal nor incidental, and are therefore unacceptable derivative works.
ℯxplicit 05:17, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
- Okay, thank you for the info about COM:PACKAGING. // sikander { talk } 12:56, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jon Kolbert (talk) 15:26, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Instant noodles of Korea
[edit]COM:PACKAGING, the main subject in these photos is the packaging, which is too complex to fall below the threshold of originality. The details are neither minimal nor incidental, and are therefore unacceptable derivative works.
ƏXPLICIT 23:54, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. – Kwj2772 (talk) 15:12, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
i uploaded an Wrong image of Station Atharvbhs (talk) 07:24, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: Author or uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content. --Wdwd (talk) 09:42, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Looking to me fairly out of scope- JuTa 14:52, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:00, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope. Only promotional file Godric ki Kothritalk to me 08:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:44, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
unused personal image Migebert (talk) 08:36, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:47, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Orphaned, replaced by File:4-Fluoroaniline.svg that is of higher quality. Leyo 09:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:48, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Book covers need OTRS-permission from copyright holder. Taivo (talk) 09:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: no permission. --Wdwd (talk) 10:06, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Poor quality, replaced by e.g. File:Phthalates General Formulae.svg. Leyo 09:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 10:08, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Deepakkailashgupta (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused logo image, without Wikipedia article (that I can find). Out of educational scope.
- File:Touristlink-logo.png
- File:Touristlink BG.jpg
- File:Touristlink social logo og.jpg
- File:Touristlink.png
- File:Touristlink-logo-256.png
--Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 16:57, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:20, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Machol machol2 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:09, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:49, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
File:20110816 總統主持嚴德發中將晉任陸軍二級上將授階及頒授楊天嘯上將三等寶鼎勳章授勳典禮 b1f7cd5af3d67622a883e56e6be2a0dd6f923210.jpg
[edit]Version with high-resolution existed. see File:President Ma presides over rank and decoration conferral ceremony for high military officers 20110816 總統主持國軍高階重要幹部晉任授階暨授勳典禮 (Flickr id 6048790104).jpeg. Howard61313 (talk) 16:02, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 09:55, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
No valid source, picture shot in France, any reason for Iranian law to apply. Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:40, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted by Jcb at 13:39, 26 August 2018 UTC: per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Benyamin-ln --Krdbot 19:05, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 12:57, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:11, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
out of scope - no educational value - unused personal artwork
INeverCry 02:08, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:51, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Map images come from http://oldmapsofacadianationalpark.blogspot.com/2016/11/maps-of-abandoned-and-lost-trails-in.html
Ytoyoda (talk) 13:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:11, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal image of two people traveling.--Kai3952 (talk) 13:51, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:19, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Radio Partage (talk · contribs)
[edit]Posters and non-trivial logo. No evidence of permission(s). Also questionable notability.
- File:Logo-Radio Partage-300x303.gif
- File:Logo-Radio Partage-300x300.jpg
- File:Logo-Radio Partage-300x304.gif
- File:Logo-Radio Partage-300x301.gif
- File:Logo-Radio Partage-300x306.gif
- File:Logo-Radio Partage-300x305.gif
- File:Logo-Radio Partage-300x302.gif
- File:Flyer A4 Radio Partage.pdf
- File:Flyer A3 Radio Partage.pdf
- File:Logo-RadioPartage-128x128.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:11, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:12, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.
- File:Trgi25r2.png
- File:Trgi25g2.png
- File:I9r.png
- File:I9g.png
- File:Target11r.png
- File:Target11g.png
- File:Target9r.png
- File:Target9g.png
- File:Target25r.png
- File:Target25g.png
- File:Target12r.png
- File:Target12g.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:14, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:12, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
There are useful uploads by this user, but that's spam.
- File:Goldozi,ahmad tayefeh,embroidery,گالری گلدوزی احمد طایفه٫گلدوزی٫برودری دوزی٫ (11).jpg
- File:Goldozi,ahmad tayefeh,embroidery,گالری گلدوزی احمد طایفه٫گلدوزی٫برودری دوزی٫ (10).jpg
- File:Goldozi,ahmad tayefeh,embroidery,گالری گلدوزی احمد طایفه٫گلدوزی٫برودری دوزی٫ (9).jpg
- File:Goldozi,ahmad tayefeh,embroidery,گالری گلدوزی احمد طایفه٫گلدوزی٫برودری دوزی٫ (8).jpg
- File:Goldozi,ahmad tayefeh,embroidery,گالری گلدوزی احمد طایفه٫گلدوزی٫برودری دوزی٫ (7).jpg
- File:Goldozi,ahmad tayefeh,embroidery,گالری گلدوزی احمد طایفه٫گلدوزی٫برودری دوزی٫ (6).jpg
- File:Goldozi,ahmad tayefeh,embroidery,گالری گلدوزی احمد طایفه٫گلدوزی٫برودری دوزی٫ (4).jpg
- File:Goldozi,ahmad tayefeh,embroidery,گالری گلدوزی احمد طایفه٫گلدوزی٫برودری دوزی٫ (1).jpg
- File:Goldozi,ahmad tayefeh,embroidery,گالری گلدوزی احمد طایفه٫گلدوزی٫برودری دوزی٫ (2).jpg
- File:(1)گلدوزی.jpg
- File:گلدوزی (58).jpg
- File:گلدوزی.jpg
Achim (talk) 11:33, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 20:43, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
This is a gallery apparently of derivative works pertaining to embroidery. Some of the images embroidered are from photos (i.e. Marilyn Monroe). In all cases, the embroidery as a 3D item has a coypright as well. Due to the side of these images (at or smaller than standard Facebook) and their low resolution/quality; it's unlikely they actually fulfill both parts of the Own Work, that the 3d work and the photo be by the same person. Also, the frames shown in several images are copied from https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/363736107377115364/, where they show as originally being from DeviantArt, which has at source " Do NOT repackage, sell it or take credit for this image as your own. From one artist to another - This is greatly appreciated!" next to a license statement. See https://www.deviantart.com/eveyd/art/Vintage-Gold-and-Silver-Frame-Oval-268104610 There does not appear to be any credit to the DeviantArtist on the Commons templates. Please note that while metadata does not credit an online platform the images have xmp numbers which also highly suggest that they were taken from another source and claimed as "own work"
- File:گلدوزی (68).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (72).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (67).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (65).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (64).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (53).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (54).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (52).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (51).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (50).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (48).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (47).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (44).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (42).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (38).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (40).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (39).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (37).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (35).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (34).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (33).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (32).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (30).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (29).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (28).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (26).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (27).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (25).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (22).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (21).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (20).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (19).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (18).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (16).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (14).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (13).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (11).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (9).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (8).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (7).jpg
- File:گلدوزی (4).jpg
Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:48, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:17, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Sólfar
[edit]The artist (Jón Gunnar Árnason) died in 1989 and Iceland has no Freedom of Panorama, so unfortunately, it seems the sculpture is still subject to copyright.
- File:Iceland Statue -1 (4052377816).jpg
- File:Summer vacation (14381690935).jpg
- File:The Sun Voyager (5926931079).jpg
- File:Vikingschip-Jon Gunnar Árnason.jpg
Themightyquill (talk) 14:52, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:23, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Files in Category:Sólfar 2
[edit]Copyrighted sculpture in Iceland where there is no Freedom of Panorama.
- File:Helgeland Kammerkor Island 2014.JPG
- File:IS - Reykjavik - Black And White - Höfuðborgarsvæðið - Viking - Road Trip (4889926131).jpg
- File:Reykjavik (14317479973).jpg
- File:Reykjavik - panoramio (9).jpg
- File:Sun Voyager.jpg
- File:Sun-craft - Reykjavik bay (3443256114).jpg
- File:Sólfar, Reykjavik, Iceland.jpg
- File:The viking boat - Reikiavik - Iceland - panoramio.jpg
Themightyquill (talk) 14:30, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:56, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:Sólfar 3
[edit]No Freedom of Panorama in Iceland. These are subject to copyright restrictions.
- File:Iceland October 2015 (21677205273).jpg
- File:Reykjavik Viking Boat Sculpture (25386518826).jpg
- File:Reykjavik Viking Boat Sculpture 2 (25319713061).jpg
- File:Reykjavík, Iceland - panoramio (3).jpg
- File:Reykjavík, Iceland - panoramio.jpg
- File:Sonnenbarke, Hafen in Reykjavik, Island.jpg
Themightyquill (talk) 14:23, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:09, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Sólfar 4
[edit]Per the category description at Category:Sólfar, these four images "[feature] an architectural or artistic work, photographed from a public space in Iceland. There are no Freedom of Panorama exemptions for commercial works in Iceland, which means that they cannot uploaded to Commons."
- File:Di nuovo a Reykjavik (9566592734).jpg
- File:Miðborg, 101 Reykjavík, Iceland - panoramio (7).jpg
- File:Solar Voyager on Reykjavik's waterfront. - panoramio.jpg
- File:Sun voyager.jpg
Lord Belbury (talk) 18:53, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry, didn't notice that. Thanks for informing me. :) 62.44.135.32 12:38, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 12:34, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Sólfar 5
[edit]Sculpture is subject to copyright. No Freedom of Panorama to use.
- File:Light And Nature (211554927).jpeg
- File:Reykjavik - panoramio (24).jpg
- File:Summer vacation (14381690935).jpg
- File:Sun Voyager (120887199).jpeg
- File:Sun Voyager (230519293).jpeg
- File:Sun Voyager (231342997).jpeg
- File:Sun Voyager (231760253).jpeg
- File:Sun Voyager.jpg
- File:Sólfarið (199918881).jpeg
- File:Waiting for the sun (43656696315).jpg
Themightyquill (talk) 20:14, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, COM:FOP Iceland, and the 4 previous DRs above. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 20:23, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:50, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
Files in Category:Sólfar 6
[edit]No Freedom of Panorama in Iceland. This sculpture is copyright restricted.
Themightyquill (talk) 18:14, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 12:52, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Sólfar 7
[edit]No Freedom of Panorama in Iceland. This sculpture is copyright restricted.
Themightyquill (talk) 18:16, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 12:52, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Sólfar 8
[edit]Sculpture is subject to copyright restrictions.
- File:Solfar sculpture, Reykjavik seafront - Flickr - Ruth and Dave.jpg
- File:The Sunship at midnight (4923469208).jpg
Themightyquill (talk) 18:40, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 04:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE (en:Cletus Babu)
- File:Abdul-Kalam-Seva-Ratna-Awards-2015.jpg
- File:Cletus Babu with Needy Children.jpg
- File:Helping Poors.jpg
- File:Receiving award for Chief Minister.jpg
- File:Social Activities.jpg
- File:SCAD Nirman.jpg
- File:Cletus babu with SCAD Students.jpg
- File:Founder and Vice Chairperson.jpg
- File:The Beginning.jpg
- File:Cletusbabu s.jpg
- File:Cletus babu.jpg
- File:ArunBabu.jpg
- File:FXEC Campus.jpg
- File:Fxec logo.png
- File:Social Change and Development - SCAD.png
- File:Cletus Babu with needy.jpg
- File:Cletus Babu.jpg
Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:40, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:18, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Who's the painter ? Unlikely to be public domain yet. Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:02, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted by Ruthven at 17:49, 30 August 2018 UTC: Mass deletion of pages added by Borgil96 --Krdbot 00:54, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
probabely damaged when uploading - vermutlich beim Hochladen beschädigt BSonne (talk) 14:47, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 09:04, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
It will be replaced by a new filename: Begleittext Landesgedenkstaette (Montage) Emil Zajic (talk) 08:10, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:37, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
Non-notable band, out of scope. And likely copyvio: image found online using Google Images. P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:40, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:39, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
No FOP in USA for 2D artworks 219.79.126.140 13:52, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:00, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:41, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
No FOP in Indonesia, PD claim from the photographer is not OK 219.79.126.140 13:52, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:03, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:42, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Italy. The bridge is under copyright. (COM:FOP#Italy) 84.250.17.211 14:02, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep - the bridge collapsed today, so this is now a document which importance overrides copyright issues. EDP. --g (talk) 23:31, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Like in the related Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ponte Morandi.jpg. The bridge is below threshold of originality, if we're following Italian Governmental Direzione Generale Arte e Architettura contemporanee e Periferie urbane [3]. --Ruthven (msg) 10:37, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Below threshold of originality. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:53, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep the bridge was commisioned and built by the Italian Government in the 1960s. So, according to Italian copyright law, all copyright rights belong to Italian Government, and any italian public administration can have economic copyright use for 20 years. --Holapaco77 (talk) 20:14, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per de minimis : the bridge is just a small and not central part of this picture --Postcrosser (talk) 15:29, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per Pigsonthewing. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:00, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:45, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Italy. (COM:FOP#Italy) 84.250.17.211 15:12, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Based on http://www.ingegneri.info/news/infrastrutture-e-trasporti/ponte-morandi-genova-analisi-infrastrutturale/ I wouldn't take for granted that the shapes shown here are original, considering there are several bridges using the same pattern. --Nemo 17:13, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep - the bridge collapsed today, so this is now a document which importance overrides copyright issues. EDP. --g (talk) 23:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment @Gianfranco: EDP aka fair use material is not allowed on Commons. However, the FoP in Italy about photos of architectural works is blurry. --Ruthven (msg) 10:05, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Landscape. And bridge like others. Jérémy-Günther-Heinz Jähnick (talk) 09:00, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep the bridge was commisioned and built by the Italian Government in the 1960s. So, according to Italian copyright law, all copyright rights belong to Italian Government, and any italian public administration can have economic copyright use for 20 years. --Holapaco77 (talk) 20:15, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep The photo is now a historical document which will be used over and over again by just any person in the world, independently of copyright issues. The Italian administration will have to care for more important issues. -- Luensu1959 (talk) 04:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: below com:TOO. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:56, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Italy. (COM:FOP#Italy) 84.250.17.211 15:14, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep - the bridge collapsed today, so this is now a document which importance overrides copyright issues. EDP. --g (talk) 23:36, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment This argument isn't valid – imho. There are no exceptions to copyright like fair use on Commons. --Ruthven (msg) 10:30, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Below threshold of originality, if we're following Italian Direzione Generale Arte e Architettura contemporanee e Periferie urbane [4]. --Ruthven (msg) 10:30, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Diese Brücke ist ein normales Ingenieurbauwerk. Was soll daran geschützt sein? --Ralf Roleček
16:45, 15 August 2018 (UTC) - Keep the bridge was commisioned and built by the Italian Government in the 1960s. So, according to Italian copyright law, all copyright rights belong to Italian Government, and any italian public administration can have economic copyright use for 20 years. --Holapaco77 (talk) 20:18, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![26 File:"l'action enchainée" sans bras de Maillol.jpg](#File:"l'action_enchainée"_sans_bras_de_Maillol.jpg){kind=link}
![27 File:"l'action enchainée" sans bras de Maillol 2.jpg](#File:"l'action_enchainée"_sans_bras_de_Maillol_2.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(17800626283).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![21:31, 14 August 2018 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2018/08/14#c-Ronhjones-2018-08-14T21:31:00.000Z-File:"l'action_enchainée"_sans_bras_de_Maillol.jpg){kind=link}
![12:21, 21 August 2018 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2018/08/14#c-Arthur_Crbz-2018-08-21T12:21:00.000Z-File:"l'action_enchainée"_sans_bras_de_Maillol.jpg){kind=link}
![21:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2018/08/14#c-Ronhjones-2018-08-14T21:32:00.000Z-File:"l'action_enchainée"_sans_bras_de_Maillol_2.jpg){kind=link}
![12:21, 21 August 2018 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2018/08/14#c-Arthur_Crbz-2018-08-21T12:21:00.000Z-File:"l'action_enchainée"_sans_bras_de_Maillol_2.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_Nathan_Walker_(49)_(42853182441).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
%DA%AF%D9%84%D8%AF%D9%88%D8%B2%DB%8C.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: per Ruthven. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:51, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
UK logo. This is above COM:TOO for UK Ronhjones (Talk) 18:08, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Speedied, G4 per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sky-Logo2017.png. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 18:58, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:47, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
Загружен ошибочно Brdbrs (talk) 18:47, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:48, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Italy. (COM:FOP#Italy) 84.250.17.211 13:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- But there is in the USA, so this is outside the jurisdiction of Italy, I figure. - 174.16.221.111 14:21, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Per Commons:Licensing, Commons only accepts to host free cultural works such as
images and other media files that are not subject to copyright restrictions which would prevent them being used by by anyone, anytime, for any purpose
. Unfortunately Italy's copyright legislation extends to architectural buildings such as this bridge built in 1963–1967, for which the copyright has not expired as of today and thus the use is restricted against Commons policy.Wikimedia Foundation hosted wikis may have allow hosting images locally for fair use, but "fair use" is not allowed on Commons per Commons:Fair use.
Unless permission is received from the copyright holder (most likely the bridge architect) via Commons:OTRS, I believe this file should be deleted – thus, this nomination. 84.250.17.211 15:04, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- The bridge architect is dead, as I understand it. Getting his permission may be tough. OTOH, someone might contact the company which owns the bridge, I suppose. - 174.16.221.111 15:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, Riccardo Morandi (enwiki) died in late 1989. Copyright of this bridge expires in 2060 (70 years after author's death), if no other legal permission is received. (Commons:Copyright rules by territory#Italy) 84.250.17.211 15:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- The bridge architect is dead, as I understand it. Getting his permission may be tough. OTOH, someone might contact the company which owns the bridge, I suppose. - 174.16.221.111 15:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Does any part of the design shown in this image cross the threshold of originality? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:47, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Bridge design is not really above TOO. EDIT: there are several open DRs for images of this bridge. Should diskussion be centralized here ?--Denniss (talk) 22:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- I argue that while it may seem simple construction for today, back in 1960s it was considered
a sort of jewel in Italian engineering, because at that time it was built with new engineering techniques
according toAndrea Montefusco, an engineering expert at Luiss University in Rome
.[1] I can consider it to have had some new creativity (and originality?) back in the time. 84.250.17.211 00:50, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep - the bridge collapsed today, so this is now a document which importance overrides copyright issues. EDP. --g (talk) 23:35, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- This is an argument for fair use and not applicable at Wikimedia Commons. 84.250.17.211 00:21, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
References
- ↑ Giuffrida, Angela (2018-08-14). Genoa bridge collapse: at least 23 killed, Italian official says. The Guardian. Retrieved on 2018-08-15.
- Keep --Isiwal (talk) 07:38, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Besides being well below the threshold of originality (there are thousands of bridges of this type worldwide), the bridge is not even the main motive of this photo. It principally shows a certain part of the city of Genoa, of which the bridge is just one of numerous elements. --Voyager (talk) 09:53, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Below threshold of originality, if we're following Italian Direzione Generale Arte e Architettura contemporanee e Periferie urbane [5]. --Ruthven (msg) 10:28, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep the bridge was commisioned and built by the Italian Government in the 1960s. So, according to Italian copyright law, all copyright rights belong to Italian Government, and any italian public administration can have economic copyright use for 20 years. --Holapaco77 (talk) 19:57, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep the bridge has collapsed, so this detailed historic image of the bridge can never be replaced. It is excellent image that will be able to be annotated in future to show the cause and path of collapse, which will become an excellent record for teaching new civil engineers. Mollwollfumble (talk) 04:54, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Please allow me a general note: since there are several RFDs regarding pictures of the same bridge, I believe it would be better to unify the discussion in one of them so that we can discuss this particular situation once, and all together.
Secondly, I have to point out some elements, once again thinking to all these images as a whole. (sorry, I couldn't make it shorter)
- the bridge was a true creative original work; it is studied in many universities, sometimes they use scaled models to teach students the special ideas the Author put in this creation. I won't get into a specific, eventually boring detail: Morandi used many [then] new solutions into his project, and they largely were unprecedented. No doubt, it was a creative work. It contained original solutions to technical problems (Italian copyright act, art. 99). It was a protected work.
- If the bridge was created and realised on behalf of a client (a public institution, in this case), this should transfer the copyright in the hands of the client (the Italian State, probably), otherwise the Author (or his heir) is still the owner of all the related rights. The Italian copyright act explicitly says so at art. 11. At the moment we don't know if Morandi created his plan autonomously, on his own, and later 'sold' it to the State; or if he received a commission to conceive it. For sure, the bridge was built by the Italian State (through one of its agencies). However, this doesn't make any difference to us, here, if we don't add to the discussion the element that in Italy, when it is the State (or a Region, a Province, a City Council or a public institution), the protection ends 20 years after the first publication, and not 70 years pma. No need to investigate, by now.
- The bridge was an architectural creative work, but now it has collapsed; this means that it doesn't exist any more. The point is that the creative work is forever lost. This work will never exist again unless it is re-built in the same place without the slightest difference from the original, in full coherence with its plan (and this will not happen, they just cannot re-build it again where it was). The work is lost.
- Morandi's ideas are still protected, since this work has been conceived and translated into technical drawings which will keep the faithful record of Morandi's creative act.
- An architectural work is made of two main aspects: its conceiving and planning (the idea) and its material realisation (the building). Both are protected under the Italian Law as a work of architecture. See the Italian copyright act here: art.2 says that the law protects "the drawings and the opere of architecture" (and 'opere' means the material object built upon the drawings). The planning, in the form of its technical drawings, is protected by 'ordinary' provisions. The 'opera', the building, too; but in this case it doesn't exist any more. Whenever we talk about the collapsed bridge, we are talking about a work that does not exist [any more]. And if it does not exist, there is nothing to protect. The only remaining object of protection is Morandi's idea, his technical drawings, which are not what we are interested into.
I regret I used a rough form in my previous posts, and in particular I regret I added a pointless reference to EDP (and I copy-pasted it across all the requests). EDP is something well beyond fair use, yet this is not a case of fair use (and I personally don't like it at all); rather, this is an uncommon case of a protected work that ceases to exist. And it's the case of the object of protection that disappears, bringing with itself all the protected rights. You can't protect something that doesn't exist, and an architectural work exist only as long as it is there, at its place, in its entirety. In this sense only, we can read the NO-FOP clause: an architectural work is protected because it is in a given place, contributing to shape that place, being a constituent part of the 'panorama'. But when it's no more there, there is nothing more to protect and the picture becomes a document, a historical proof of what once was there. The bridge is not a work, any more, it was a work until yesterday it became a tragedy and a bunch of ruins. The picture is not reproducing the panorama in Genova, it witnesses how it once was. 'Panorama' is by its mere nature a current state of the shapes, a current landscape. No one ever suggested to delete landscape or cityscape paintings of centuries ago, you wouldn't delete Canaletto's works just because of NO-FOP: panorama is an always-current, and an only-current concept. The bridge left Genova's panorama and this loss cannot be reverted. --g (talk) 01:32, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- Your reasoning seems nonsensical. Temporary landscape art, such as Christo's, remains copyright-protected, including images made during its period of existence, after the work of art itself has ceased to exist, subject to laws (and expiration periods) as applicable for each legal entity (such as countries, EU, etc). Hence, no actual Wrapped Reichstag images in Commons.
- Above you say "...No need to investigate, by now..." regarding the likely expired state-owned copyright for the bridge in Italy. On the contrary, that's all that matters. Likely the copyright *has* expired, and thus these images should be kept, unreservedly, if that is the case, and removed, unreservedly, if that is not the case and no other legal exception can be invoked. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:01, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- a) Italian copyright act gives specific provisions for architectural works, different from those regarding artworks. And I mentioned Canaletto because he painted architectural works, thus depicting Venice's panorama; to produce his artworks he painted what today would be prohibited to share, under the NO-FOP, if panorama was an undetermined context in time. Christo didn't make an architectural work, he made an artwork.
- b) an investigation is needed, in case you believe that the collapse didn't extinguish the object of protection, because at the moment we don't know whether the bridge was built by the State directly (a Ministry, a State Agency, ...) or through one of its public companies (i.e. ANAS): these public companies operate in different legal ways, and we should check their precise juridical status and the effects on the evaluation of copyright. Not easy, not quick. We'll check, if necessary, but this will take a lot of time.
- c) Morandi's creation, I repeat, is still protected in (and via) his drawings, and if I ask Morandi's heirs to show me the rights they inherited, so that I can buy them, they can show me and sell me the drawings; not the work, any more. The protection against an eventual plagiarism (a smart engineer builds the same bridge somewhere else), is still there, plagiarism will be demonstrated via Morandi's drawings. No-FOP is about the presence of Morandi's creation in the configuration of the landscape. It's about what the law calls "opere", not their drawings. This "opera" is down. --g (talk) 15:04, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'm sure you're half wrong, and alas wrong on the essential points – and probably right on some less important details that have no real bearing on the issue. Either it is copyright-protected (or under a similar protection that would make it unacceptable for Commons), which is absolutely and utterly unrelated with it existing in three-dimensional life-size space, in drawings, in scale models, in life-size models, copies or images of whatever kind etc, or, alternatively, it isn't under such protection (any more), which is also, and equally, unrelated to it still standing 100%, or 0%, or anything in between. Your speculations are quite unhelpful: I'd suggest someone else check whether the images of the bridge (collapsed/uncollapsed) are suitable for Commons – I fear you might be led astray by unfounded speculations. Could WMF legal look it up and/or contact someone understanding the Italian legal system in these matters? Tx. --Francis Schonken (talk) 15:28, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- «In particolare sono comprese nella protezione: [...] 5) i disegni e le opere dell'architettura;» - ICA, art.2 c. 5.
- This is the text. There certainly will be someone who can translate it better than me. My point was to let everybody know about this text, and certainly I added how I read it. I'm not here to be sure, right, wrong, and I can't share feelings, fears, speculations, 100%s, I prefer sticking to the facts. There is a law, it is there to be read. The point is how it should be read by the Commons' Community. --g (talk) 17:35, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- Indeed, that Italian law does include (without difference in treatment) "opere della scultura" (sculpture, c. 4), designs (disegni) and works (opere) of architecture (dell'architettura). Also, afaics nothing about the 20 years for bridges or other constructions built by the Italian state, which you mentioned earlier. So, I don't think we have anything here, and don't think we can accept your assertions at face value. --Francis Schonken (talk) 18:24, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- I think Holapaco and Gianfranco were refering to Law 22 April 1941 n. 633 (here is the text updated to 2016) : article 11 says copyright over creative works created and published under the Italian state, provinces or municipalities belongs to them, and article 29 says that this copyright lasts for 20 years. --Postcrosser (talk) 20:44, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, those two articles are the ones to look at. But by now we don't know if Morandi made his drawing for his client (the State), or he first made them and later "sold" them to the State. Also, we don't know if the entity that built the bridge was a Ministry, another public institution or a public company; in the latter case we still should check whether it was operating as a public entity (diritto pubblico) or as a private one (diritto privato). --g (talk) 00:11, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- You're making, again, non-relevant distinctions: at least distinctions appearing nowhere in the cited laws. Whatever happened before "publication" is irrelevant: if the Italian state published (which seems to be the case here) it really doesn't matter whether the designer made his plans before or after being commissioned to have a bridge built according to these plans. The bridge was "published" by being built. 20 years after that publication (1967 + 20 = 1987 → 1 January 1988) the copyright expired, whether at that point the bridge was still standing or not. All photographs made by third parties after 31 december 1987 were free of copyright to the Italian state (or to the architect), and that's it: these photographs (insofar they are free of copyright towards photographers) are suitable for Commons without reservations.
- And we need an update to COM:FOP#Italy, which apparently misses the point here. --Francis Schonken (talk) 05:30, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- The "distinction" is not irrelevant at all, to activate the situation described in art. 11 and 29 it DOES make a difference to check whether the idea was conceived independently or as the fruit of a contract between Morandi and the State. If it wasn't created as an effect of the contract, it is still the full Author's copyright (70pma). And about the building of the bridge, the "Società Condotte" (the entity that officially produced it) was a company owned by the Vatican, hence a private entity, but if it acted as a contractor for the Italian State, we need to understand which was the relationship, which was the Condotte's juridical status for the job, and with what legal effects. Otherwise you can't say who owned the copyright and under which regime.
When I repeat that the law makes a difference between disegni (drawings) and opere (the building) it is because there are two distinct objects of protection. In this case they follow two separate lines of protection, so you have to isolate the drawings from the cement. You have to be very precise because the situation could be quite complicated: Morandi could have planned in a way that doesn't activate art. 11 for drawings while it does for the 'opera'; and the work could have been built by operators that don't trigger the same article for the 'work' while leaving it active for drawings. Any combination is possible, at the moment, since we know so little about. No one ever said it was simple. --g (talk) 08:33, 17 August 2018 (UTC)- Re. "The "distinction" is not irrelevant (etc...)" – nonsense: as customary in copyright law, first publication is all what matters. The "contract" exception possibility of art. 11 does not apply to building projects by the Italian state. Please just read it without complementing it with your own speculations.
- Really, your speculations are unhelpful: the Italian law does not "distinguish" drawings (disegni) and works (opere): it mentions them both as falling under the same regulation, explicitly stating that the "mode" (as drawing, as realised construction, as scale model, as 3D animation, or whatever) of first publication has no bearing on how the law applies. When the ideas where conceived, whether they were conceived in someone's head, on a piece of paper, modelled in clay, or whatever, as long as they aren't published it makes no difference to that Italian law. The only thing that matters is when and by whom the first publication happens. In the case of this bridge, that would be the Italian state publishing in 1967 at the latest.
- The contractor building the bridge, whether a company owned by the pope or whatever, is also irrelevant: the Italian copyright law as cited makes the one who pays for it (in this case, the Italian state) the one owning the copyright at the time of "publication".
- We're also only talking about photographs of the IRL bridge (before and after partial collapse), not about publishing drawings or models by the architect (whether or not these were ever published), which have no bearing on photographic reproductions of the actual built bridge after the state-owned copyright on the bridge expired. --Francis Schonken (talk) 10:26, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry to inform everybody that the Italian law is not that simple. It isn't as simple as we would like it to be, and certainly not as someone describes it. The same existence of a NO-FOP regime has to be deduced, since it's not in any explicit text of any Italian official act. Wikimedia Italia had to request a specific study, that was delivered a couple of weeks ago, just to finally receive a true formal confirmation that we really are in a NO-FOP regime. And now I believe we've taken too much space in this page; time to let other users say how they read the law. --g (talk) 11:03, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- Italian law is certainly not as complex as you would like it to be. As long as you keep adding apparently unnecessary layers of complexity to it, I can speak for myself, thank you. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:10, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- We're at this point because you didn't accept what I had said before: "no need to investigate by now". Now we are investigating, and what have we obtained?
- Let's go back to facts. The bridge collapsed. The work does not exist any more. --g (talk) 11:19, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- So, instead of letting others speak, as you suggested, you reiterate the initial nonsense, without a single demonstrable support in the applicable laws? No thanks: as said, I can speak for myself, and if unsupported speculation is brought forward, I'll denounce it as before. As said, whether or not the bridge continues to exist (and, BTW, it at least still partially exists), has no bearing on copyright issues of photographs made of it, whether these photographs were made before or after its partial collapse. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:33, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- Italian law is certainly not as complex as you would like it to be. As long as you keep adding apparently unnecessary layers of complexity to it, I can speak for myself, thank you. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:10, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry to inform everybody that the Italian law is not that simple. It isn't as simple as we would like it to be, and certainly not as someone describes it. The same existence of a NO-FOP regime has to be deduced, since it's not in any explicit text of any Italian official act. Wikimedia Italia had to request a specific study, that was delivered a couple of weeks ago, just to finally receive a true formal confirmation that we really are in a NO-FOP regime. And now I believe we've taken too much space in this page; time to let other users say how they read the law. --g (talk) 11:03, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- The "distinction" is not irrelevant at all, to activate the situation described in art. 11 and 29 it DOES make a difference to check whether the idea was conceived independently or as the fruit of a contract between Morandi and the State. If it wasn't created as an effect of the contract, it is still the full Author's copyright (70pma). And about the building of the bridge, the "Società Condotte" (the entity that officially produced it) was a company owned by the Vatican, hence a private entity, but if it acted as a contractor for the Italian State, we need to understand which was the relationship, which was the Condotte's juridical status for the job, and with what legal effects. Otherwise you can't say who owned the copyright and under which regime.
- Yes, those two articles are the ones to look at. But by now we don't know if Morandi made his drawing for his client (the State), or he first made them and later "sold" them to the State. Also, we don't know if the entity that built the bridge was a Ministry, another public institution or a public company; in the latter case we still should check whether it was operating as a public entity (diritto pubblico) or as a private one (diritto privato). --g (talk) 00:11, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- I think Holapaco and Gianfranco were refering to Law 22 April 1941 n. 633 (here is the text updated to 2016) : article 11 says copyright over creative works created and published under the Italian state, provinces or municipalities belongs to them, and article 29 says that this copyright lasts for 20 years. --Postcrosser (talk) 20:44, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- Indeed, that Italian law does include (without difference in treatment) "opere della scultura" (sculpture, c. 4), designs (disegni) and works (opere) of architecture (dell'architettura). Also, afaics nothing about the 20 years for bridges or other constructions built by the Italian state, which you mentioned earlier. So, I don't think we have anything here, and don't think we can accept your assertions at face value. --Francis Schonken (talk) 18:24, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'm sure you're half wrong, and alas wrong on the essential points – and probably right on some less important details that have no real bearing on the issue. Either it is copyright-protected (or under a similar protection that would make it unacceptable for Commons), which is absolutely and utterly unrelated with it existing in three-dimensional life-size space, in drawings, in scale models, in life-size models, copies or images of whatever kind etc, or, alternatively, it isn't under such protection (any more), which is also, and equally, unrelated to it still standing 100%, or 0%, or anything in between. Your speculations are quite unhelpful: I'd suggest someone else check whether the images of the bridge (collapsed/uncollapsed) are suitable for Commons – I fear you might be led astray by unfounded speculations. Could WMF legal look it up and/or contact someone understanding the Italian legal system in these matters? Tx. --Francis Schonken (talk) 15:28, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per Voyager. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:16, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Italy. (COM:FOP#Italy) 84.250.17.211 13:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Nothing shown here crosses the threshold of originality. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:02, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per AMabbett. Serial Number 54129 (talk) 20:49, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep - the bridge collapsed today, so this is now a document which importance overrides copyright issues. EDP. --g (talk) 23:36, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep --Isiwal (talk) 07:31, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment In the US, bridges are not protected by copyright law. We should explore the copyright in architecture in Italy, before any decision is made.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 07:58, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep No threshold of originality, and per Gianfranco. Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 09:26, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Well below the threshold of originality. --Voyager (talk) 10:02, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep As per Voyager. Below threshold of originality, if we're following Italian Governmental Direzione Generale Arte e Architettura contemporanee e Periferie urbane [6]. --Ruthven (msg) 10:35, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Related: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Genova ponte Morandi.jpg. ––Apalsola t • c 11:10, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep below ToO --Itu (talk) 12:58, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep La loi italienne ne s'applique pas aux USA ou en France (ou au Canada). No extra-territorial reach of Italian law. Malosse (talk) 15:50, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep the bridge was commisioned and built by the Italian Government in the 1960s. So, according to Italian copyright law, all copyright rights belong to Italian Government, and any italian public administration can have economic copyright use for 20 years. --Holapaco77 (talk) 20:19, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Well below the threshold of originality.--Schnellbehalter (talk) 08:03, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- ? The photo shows much more than details of a bridge: Houses in Genoa, a container train in the right of the photo (I have added the photo to Category:Turin–Genoa railway and to the Cat. of the visible quarter Certosa (Genova) upstream the valley), the "river" Polcevera and some mountains there. The bridge is dominant, but it crosses the valley. Keep the photo without the architectural peaks of the bridge in the cloudy sky? And about details: no photos, no questions, no discussions about causes of the disaster, but a silent view to the deleted reality in Italy? Is the silence about the not free and problematic details and the missing freedom of panorama in Italy, the diminishing right to take photos in Europe and keep them to have a look back in history one of the longterm causes for such disasters? Shall we have a photo with the blacked out bridge for the Italian Wikipedia (!) like File:Atomium 010-censored.png (since 2016 FOP in Belgium ...), or is it necessary to write about the missing FOP in Italy and de minimis in the subtitles / captions of all architectural photos from Italy if we use them in Wikipedia articles or if they are missing (deleted) in WP-articles? Only allowed in wikipedia with use of a small version of Template:NoFoP-Italy? --LudwigSebastianMicheler (talk) 17:36, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per Pigsonthewing. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:13, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Italy. (COM:FOP#Italy) 84.250.17.211 13:49, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep - the bridge collapsed today, so this is now a document which importance overrides copyright issues. EDP. --g (talk) 23:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep --Isiwal (talk) 07:42, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Jérémy-Günther-Heinz Jähnick (talk) 09:01, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep I am the author of the image and I consider it absurd to delete this image for (questionable) legal issues; the tragedy that involved the bridge makes this image a historical document.--Bbruno 10:34, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Like in the related Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ponte Morandi.jpg. The bridge is below threshold of originality, if we're following Italian Governmental Direzione Generale Arte e Architettura contemporanee e Periferie urbane [7]. --Ruthven (msg) 10:49, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Below threshold of originality. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:51, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Eh bien, la loi italienne ne s'applique ni aux USA ni en France. No extra-territorial reach of Italian law. Malosse (talk) 15:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep the bridge was commisioned and built by the Italian Government in the 1960s. So, according to Italian copyright law, all copyright rights belong to Italian Government, and any italian public administration can have economic copyright use for 20 years. --Holapaco77 (talk) 20:16, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- keep per de minimis Pierpao.lo (listening) 06:32, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep La loi italienne interdit donc de faire des photographies en Italie ? C'est curieux pour un pays aussi touristique. Il faudrait déjà vérifier d'où ce contributeur non enregistré sort son affirmation. E' vero che la legge italiana vieta di fare fotografie in Italia? È strano per un paese così turistico. Dovremmo già verificare da dove questo contribuente non registrato ha ricevuto la sua dichiarazione. Is it really true that the Italian law prohibits taking photographs in Italy? It's strange for such a touristic place. We should first check where this unregistered contributor got his statement from. --Otto Didakt (talk) 13:08, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Otto Didakt: , it is partially true : to make it simple, in some countries there is an exception to copyright called "freedom of panorama" that means that if a work of art or architecture is permanently displayed in a public place (as can be a bridge or a statue in a public square) you are free to take photos of it and use them in the way you prefer. In Italy there is not this exception : you can still take photos of almost everything for your personal use, but if you take a photo of a work under copyright you have to respect the copyright of the author to use them for commercial use for example. --Postcrosser (talk) 15:22, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Si @Postcrosser: , ma dovresti aggiungere che di fatto è (giustamente) disattesa, tranne qui, dove causa spesso interminabili discussioni. Se fosse applicata alla lettera, non potremmo avere su Wiki immagini di luoghi italiani dove ci siano edifici o altro costruiti negli ultimi cent'anni o giù di lì. - Ok, but you should add that in fact this law is disregarded, except here, where it often causes endless discussions. If literally applied, we could not have in Wiki images of Italian places with buildings built in the last hundred years.--Bbruno 15:45, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Otto Didakt: , it is partially true : to make it simple, in some countries there is an exception to copyright called "freedom of panorama" that means that if a work of art or architecture is permanently displayed in a public place (as can be a bridge or a statue in a public square) you are free to take photos of it and use them in the way you prefer. In Italy there is not this exception : you can still take photos of almost everything for your personal use, but if you take a photo of a work under copyright you have to respect the copyright of the author to use them for commercial use for example. --Postcrosser (talk) 15:22, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep The bridge collapsed today, so this picture is not a of panorama in Italy. --Chalupa (talk) 11:17, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Just one word: "Ridiculous". --Io Herodotus (talk) 08:01, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per Pigsonthewing. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:06, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Italy. (COM:FOP#Italy) 84.250.17.211 13:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep - the bridge collapsed today, so this is now a document which importance overrides copyright issues. EDP. --g (talk) 20:12, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep --Isiwal (talk) 07:41, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Below threshold of originality, if we're following Italian Direzione Generale Arte e Architettura contemporanee e Periferie urbane [8]. And the photo is even showing just the concrete pilars of the bridge. --Ruthven (msg) 10:34, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Well below threshold of originality. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:50, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep the bridge was commisioned and built by the Italian Government in the 1960s. So, according to Italian copyright law, all copyright rights belong to Italian Government, and any italian public administration can have economic copyright use for 20 years. --Holapaco77 (talk) 20:14, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Below threshold of originality. --Yoggysot (talk) 23:11, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- KeepBelow threshold of originalityFerdi2005 (Posta) 15:22, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Below threshold of originality.--Postcrosser (talk) 15:28, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep This part of the bridge is still standing --Awd (talk) 11:32, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per Ruthven. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:05, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
Poor quality, many better alternatives in Category:Acetic acid. Leyo 09:45, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- File:Kyselina octová.svg is the same in SVG I think? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 15:21, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ed (Edgar181) 18:05, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Poor quality; many better alternatives in Category:2-aminobenzoic acid. Leyo 09:48, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ed (Edgar181) 18:04, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Poor quality, many better alternatives in Category:Caprylic acid. Leyo 09:51, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ed (Edgar181) 18:04, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Poor quality, replaced by many better alternatives in Category:2-Ethylhexanol. Leyo 09:52, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ed (Edgar181) 18:04, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Poor quality, many better alternatives available in Category:MTBE. Leyo 09:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ed (Edgar181) 18:04, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Facebook image, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 15:58, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted, small photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 10:12, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Low quality screenshot, all of this user's other uploads were copyvios Ytoyoda (talk) 13:05, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 19:45, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
This photo should stay up. This is not a promotional photo. It is a legitimate photograph of the artist at her exhibit. It gives credit to the photographer who did give permission to use this photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosequartzalabaster (talk • contribs) 06:19, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Promo photo. No evidence of permission(s). EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:40, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
This photograph was taken by Photographer Lisa Iddings of the Artist, Nika Nesgoda, at her opening reception event. It is not a promotional photo. It is authorized by the photographer, Lisa Iddings, to be published with credit as it was originally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosequartzalabaster (talk • contribs) 06:30, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- So LaurenCrewsy and Lisa Iddings are the same person? Kendall-K1 (talk) 23:12, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 19:47, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Official symbol. Proper license tag should be used if it's in public domain.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:15, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yasu (talk) 15:28, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:17, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yasu (talk) 15:30, 15 September 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. Furthermore there are several files in Category:AAI RQ-7 Shadow which supersed this one. Jotzet (talk) 16:00, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 19:13, 15 September 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) 16:10, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted, corrupt upload. Taivo (talk) 19:20, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
Image taken from Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/trinitycollegefl/photos/pcb.10155382412066331/10155382410971331/?type=3&theater Ytoyoda (talk) 14:44, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted per nom. OTRS permission needed. Strakhov (talk) 18:05, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
File:Annals of the South African Museum = Annale van die Suid-Afrikaanse Museum (1953) (17800626283).jpg
[edit]_(17800626283).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(17800626283).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The archive.org page says non commercial:[9] Yet again, I think these Flickr journal scan mass uploads are iffy overall. FunkMonk (talk) 08:35, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per COM:CRT. --Fæ (talk) 09:09, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- That can of course work, but this tag was not there originally. FunkMonk (talk) 09:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept, let's say, that the image is fixed now. Taivo (talk) 20:13, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
blurry, 2 better versions exist Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 05:27, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ezarateesteban 23:22, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
unused, personal photo, out of project Sakhalinio (talk) 07:58, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ezarateesteban 23:21, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
likely a screengrab from a low-resolution video Ringerfan23 (talk) 08:28, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ezarateesteban 23:21, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
copyright work... Saqib (talk) 08:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: COM:FOP in Pakistan is ok. --Ezarateesteban 23:19, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
- also file:New zavod.jpg
Description says "Post-war photos", which apparently means "post-WWII photos". Own work is unlikely, but the photos are not enough old to be in public domain due to age. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 09:50, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: not an own work, no source provided. --Ezarateesteban 23:17, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
The logo is not made of only simple geometrical figures and is eligible for copyright. Taivo (talk) 09:59, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ezarateesteban 23:16, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
Unused logo of non-notable TV-channel (not mentioned neither in en.wiki nor in es.wiki), out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 10:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ezarateesteban 23:15, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
Source no longer exists. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 02:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Is it a valid reason? Do we have such a policy? Alaexis (talk) 06:51, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Alaexis: no, we don't, so to be more precise: images from Flickr require a license review, the uploader never requested one, now the source is gone so the license can't be reviewed. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 07:06, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: without source, it failed license review. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:42, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Redundant to the png version B dash (talk) 03:06, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment I transferred because the latter is based upon the former. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 10:52, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: needs to be kept as source file of the PNG version. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:44, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Marked as "All Rights Reserved" in the website B dash (talk) 03:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep The old Website vectoropenstock.com has moved in 2017 with redirection to vexels.com, a commercial one. The old one had CC-Licenses. (see here) Before it was looking like this with a CC-BY-Icon. --Migebert (talk) 13:54, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment: However, there are no source of the original image, may be derivative work of non-free content. --B dash (talk) 02:26, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per User:Migebert. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:48, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Marked as "All Rights Reserved" in the website B dash (talk) 03:30, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep The old Website vectoropenstock.com has moved in 2017 with redirection to vexels.com, a commercial one. The old one had CC-Licenses. (see here) Before it was looking like this with a CC-BY-Icon. --Migebert (talk) 13:54, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment: However, there are no source of the original image, may be derivative work of non-free content. --B dash (talk) 02:27, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per User:Migebert. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:48, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Marked as "All Rights Reserved" in the website B dash (talk) 03:31, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep The old Website vectoropenstock.com has moved in 2017 with redirection to vexels.com, a commercial one. The old one had CC-Licenses. (see here) Before it was looking like this with a CC-BY-Icon. --Migebert (talk) 13:54, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment: However, there are no source of the original image, may be derivative work of non-free content. --B dash (talk) 02:26, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per User:Migebert. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:48, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Air-xtreme (talk · contribs)
[edit]Small image, lack of EXIF data
- File:Edwin-kun.jpg
- File:Air-xtreme08.jpg
- File:Air-xtreme07.jpg
- File:Air-xtreme06.jpg
- File:Air-xtreme05.jpg
- File:Air-xtreme04.jpg
- File:Air-xtreme03.jpg
- File:Air-xtreme02.jpg
- File:Air-xtreme01.jpg
- File:Air-xtreme1.jpg
- File:Strom-kun.jpg
B dash (talk) 04:13, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:49, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
The full image use policy at the Wayback Machine from that time included non-comm restrictions. Media generated by IU may be used for non-commercial purposes. No evidence that this was under a fully free license for use here. Majora (talk) 04:21, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, incompatible license. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:52, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation; TOO is very strict in Britain. Lordtobi (✉) 06:37, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Finnusertop (talk) 22:22, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:53, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
google maps screenshot, image is watermarked Ringerfan23 (talk) 08:46, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Finnusertop (talk) 22:22, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:55, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Goldenvimal (talk · contribs)
[edit]These are not COM:EDUSE but COM:SELFIE
- File:Amparesvg1534199414174.svg
- File:V sign.svg.svg
- File:Gv sign.svg
- File:Goldenvimal24.jpg
- File:G (307).jpg
- File:Nsv0151-1.jpg
- File:Goldenvimal.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
A-wiki-guest-user (talk) 10:06, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep all except for File:V sign.svg.svg which should be deleted. All others are COM:INUSE in other projects. Finnusertop (talk) 22:25, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: personal and promotional images. Uploader has no meaningful contributions on any wp. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:59, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Goldenvimal (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE.
Patrick Rogel (talk) 15:37, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 14:36, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Tourist (Jack of all trades) spoiles the photo. Out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 10:08, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, many alternatives available in Category:Sambisari. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:07, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Poor quality, no reason to keep it alongside File:FlagPF.jpg and File:Flag_of_Pensacola.svg This, that and the other (talk) 02:28, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:19, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Completely fictuous, and also misleading, as it directly claims to be the flag of the city of Pensacola, which doesn't have a flag. Snow Lion Fenian (talk) 10:19, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment: See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Pensacola.svg. Χ (talk) 13:19, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, no educational value. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:08, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
I uploaded this. SVG version of "https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Spirolactone_structures.png". But SVG not displaying for some reason. Please delete. Thank you. Medgirl131 (talk) 10:25, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
I uploaded this, please delete. Medgirl131 (talk) 02:32, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: 14:57, 2 October 2018, by Edgar181. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:08, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Small photo without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. I suspect not own work, but copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 10:30, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:09, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
es:Club Social y Deportivo Sol de Mayo was deleted due to promotionality. Probably its logo is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 11:10, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:09, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Out of project scope due to small size and bad quality. We have hundreds of sunsets of Venezuela. Taivo (talk) 11:19, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:09, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
No permission. Copyright is clear on the art.com website. Uploader needs to provide proof that author is DOD Gbawden (talk) 12:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Do not delete. I'm not the author of the file, but the source is actually from https://www.art.com/gallery/id--b6703-d207232/jimmy-carter-framed-posters.htm, Author by Department of Defense. Department of the Navy. Naval Photographic Center. Lý Ngọc Đạt (talk) 13:48, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: duplicate of File:Official portrait of Jimmy Carter - NARA - 179156.jpg. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:12, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:20, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:16, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:16, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
This seems to be a joke about a soccer team: the word "vice" means runner-up. The correct file is this one: Esporte Clube Vitória logo.png Py4nf (talk) 14:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:16, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from book covers. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:37, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:19, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:19, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:59, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:22, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Ordinary holiday snap, nobody of enyclopaedic relevance depicted. Possible privacy violation. Zenwort (talk) 15:13, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Agree--JotaCartas (talk) 22:43, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:23, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
I do not understand, what is depicted. Maybe the photo is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 15:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, no context to give it any educational value. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:24, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Likely copyvio. Professional photograph. ~ Rob13Talk 15:42, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete In addition, Oout of project scope. --Randykitty (talk) 15:19, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:24, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope: Private image / Self-promotion not realistically useful for an educational purpose. Jotzet (talk) 16:13, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:25, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope: Private image / Self-promotion not realistically useful for an educational purpose. Jotzet (talk) 16:13, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:25, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Nonnotable unused logo, no reason to keep it. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:25, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
COM:ADVERTising... from a fake plant maker. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:25, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Conflicting information. The picture itself gives a copyright symbol. The page it is taken fom has a CC0-license. Is this allowed or not? The Banner (talk) 18:10, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- This is allowed. (c) is not a license, and freely licensed material still has an owner of copyrights. Edoderoo (talk) 18:23, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per User:Edoderoo. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:26, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Low quality image that is being used for image spamming on en-WP (see en:wp:Sockpuppet investigations/Vwegba4real) to promote a "prophet" in Nigeria (see en:Isaiah Ogedegbe...) Thomas.W talk 18:18, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:27, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
Illustrations of books uploaded as own work (and consequently, with a CC license). Without a clear information about the author, we should wait the canonical 120 years from publication.
- File:Octave Mirbeau - La Cartera.jpg
- File:L'Epidémie, par J.-P. Carré.jpg
- File:Les affaires sont les affaires - acte II.jpg
- File:Les affaires sont les affaires - Germaine et Lucien.jpg
- File:Les affaires sont les affaires - Lechat et Porcellet.jpg
- File:Les affaires sont les affaires - Germaine et sa mère.jpg
- File:Due ritratti del Kaiser, Soneogno, 1915..jpg
- File:Zahrada Muk-1918.jpg
- File:Jean Launois, le bureau de placement du Journal d'une femme de chambre.jpg
- File:Triceps, dans LÉpidémie, par J.-P. Carré.jpg
- File:Le général Archinard dans son salon tapissé de "peaux de nègres".jpg
- File:Les affaires sont les affaires - dernière scène.jpg
- File:Octave Mirbeau, Les Souvenirs d'un pauvre diable.jpg
- File:Botte di sidro.jpg
Ruthven (msg) 06:14, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:34, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kalim Ajeem (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal type photos, out of scope
- File:Vv025.jpg
- File:Shahjinde2.jpg
- File:Shahajinde1.jpg
- File:Shahajinde.jpg
- File:Prof.-Bennur-301x440.jpg
- File:फ. म. शहाजिंदे.jpg
- File:FM Shahajinde.jpg
Gbawden (talk) 12:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: likely copyvios: inconsistent sizes and styles, web size, and no EXIF data. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:37, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kalim Ajeem (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photo and drawing. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:44, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 13:47, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope, unused personal photo B dash (talk) 13:59, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep along with 2 and File:Chaco Canyon (3).jpg. This is a decent quality photo documenting an historic event at a specific place. Even if the subjects are not notable, this type of photo has educational value, which increases over time (cf. photos of people in the subcategories of Category:Solar eclipses by date). Category:People with solar eclipse glasses isn't exactly overflowing either. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:18, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. Focus is solely on the person (not on the historic event), and there are many less personal alternative images of people using solar glasses already available in its category. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:43, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope, unused personal photo B dash (talk) 14:00, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:43, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope, unused personal photo B dash (talk) 14:00, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:43, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Unlikely to be own work. Small size, no metadata. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 14:05, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: watermark indicates DW. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:44, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:18, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:46, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
not good photo Manjur545 (talk) 14:34, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; in use. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:56, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:41, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Hi this is df9465 - I am the curator of this museum (Denver Fowler) and I took this photo and created the reduced size image. I also added a few more images of my museum so that they can be used on our wikipedia page. I will upload the original full-resolution photo to wikimedia too if that helps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Df9465 (talk • contribs) 01:35, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Ok. I added the original: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dickinson_Museum_Center_main_entrance_full_resolution.jpg Df9465 (talk)
Kept: per User:Df9465. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:05, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Paul Stevie (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:42, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hi I don't know what qualifies to be called own work especially here. Do I need to ask this place that I now need to take some images around my city which I will post here? The contributions I'm making here are for my cit, and I need to show it to everyone outside what it is like. And you have a problem with that? I think I fully understand what this place is for, and have total respect for another one's work. I'll be making many changes to the facts provided under my city. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Stevie (talk • contribs) 08:29, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: one as copyvio. Kept one (for now) because all results from Google Images are WP mirrors. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:15, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Incorporates Trinity College logo and a photo sourced to Billy Graham's organization: http://www.nbc12.com/story/37568540/procession-route-announced-for-rev-billy-graham Ytoyoda (talk) 14:42, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:16, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Incorporates image taken from http://thegospelguru.com/2012/07/the-gospel-guru-interviews-kb/ Ytoyoda (talk) 14:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, and pure advertising. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:18, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Incorporates image taken from https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/teaching-children-to-pray-guiding-principles/ Ytoyoda (talk) 14:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, and pure advertising. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:19, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:05, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:21, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Facebook image and selfie, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 15:57, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:21, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
Not public domain in France nor in the U.S.A. Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:05, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- The picture was created by me during a show so i do not see what is the problem. Anyone can use it, I am giving it to wiki pd !Fan années 70 (talk) 20:38, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no reason given why this would be copyvio. Not found online using Google Images. Own work asserted by uploader. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:10, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Previously published at https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.maison-heinrich-heine.fr/files/.thumbs/photos/2018/4_avril/2018_04_12_voyages_en_terre_brune/x750/img_5044.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.maison-heinrich-heine.fr/manifestations-culturelles/2018/avril/voyages-en-terre-brune&h=750&w=1332&tbnid=6aW0uXHG8yLe-M&tbnh=168&tbnw=299&usg=__iDooVmj4YUizcQV8rgFdb3cJyEI=&docid=MoT8y5rTYGU1-M, the website of the depicted individual. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:17, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 관인생략 as Copyvio (Copyvio) - requires some form of evidence, not just pushing the button. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:30, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- According to 양수빈, this picture was derived from this person's facebook account. --관인생략 (talk) 00:53, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:20, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
"FBMD" in meta shows this upload is also a copyvio having been in and out of Facebook before upload here. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:32, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:20, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Similar to http://cleubercarlos.blogspot.com/2018/05/noticia-boa-nodulo-no-figado-de-vitti-e.html Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio, found online. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:22, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
The image was uploaded by Newlink TV, an advertise organisation, whose owner is the photographed person: http://quinto-poder.mx/trendy/filtran-contratos-con-los-que-pena-nieto-hizo-millonario-a-callo-de-hacha/ Luisalvaz (talk) 16:40, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Hola Luis, se te ruega por favor tomar en serio la plataforma. Aquí no venimos a discutir tus posturas políticas, y no deberías usar wikipedia par hacerlo. Por favor, la próxima vez que cites un artículo tienes la responsabilidad de buscar fuentes confiables, no de propaganda. Esa foto es en los MTV Millennial Awards, una empresa de entretenimiento sin relación a tu fuente "el quinto poder". Buen día. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 189.216.104.159 (talk) 18:29, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Either way, Newlinktv has to prove that owns the rights of picture or that has the permission to use it with the correspondent license. --Luisalvaz (talk) 23:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:25, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
The same problems occur for each of these images: both are small and low quality images apparently uploaded to fill in pages in the project. Both are claimed as own work, one is supposedly "from the 1980s" but if it were own work, would one not know when it was taken? The other image is so blurry it looks as if it's been reproduced several times before the tiny 29Kb upload here.
Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:42, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Elin, both fotos you point at are from my personal archive. The families of both Pavel Klein and Milada Blekastad know about that they have been uploaded and agreed with their free usage. Frigg (talk) 16:59, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Personal archive, doesn't equal "own work". Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:55, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry, better to post it her, I see.
Hi Elin, I wonder which licence I should use if I want to publish an old photo of a person I write an article about. I have no troubles to obtain the pictures from the archives together with their consent to upload it on Wikimedia Commons. However, I probably don't know how to upload them correctly. The example is a historical photo of Emma Černá you deleted a couple of days ago. I got it from the Czech Arts and Theatre institute https://www.idu.cz/en The author of the picture is unknown. Recently I have been sent a picture of the same actor from National Film Archive in Prague (http://nfa.cz/en/). The Film Archive again gave its consent that the picture is published through Wikimedia Commons under the free lience. The picture is taken from the film. So again I am not sure how to state the autorship and express the NFA consent.
I would be glad if you could advise me in this respect. Karolína Stehlíková/Frigg Frigg (talk) 08:40, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- Please see COM:L, COM:CRT and COM:Hirtle for assistance. "Old" is not enough to even guess, especially since you don't know the author. Third party has no more right to give away rights than I could tell someone it was ok to drive your car without your permission. So sorry. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:00, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:29, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Similar to http://topnaija.ng/how-my-interest-in-tech-started-from-cybercafe-timothy-adeleye-forbes-under-30-entrepreneur-reveals/. Seems a Forbes picture. Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:49, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:29, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Likely a copyrighted image as it shows a signature on it. Pierre cb (talk) 17:53, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- KeepThe signature is the author´s signature. Some people like to signs their pictures in that way...--ProfessorX (talk) 14:37, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, per User:ProfessorX. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:30, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Company logos are seldom own work. License seems incorrect. The Banner (talk) 18:03, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep PD-textlogo. Fry1989 eh? 17:20, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo and in use. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:35, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Company logos are seldom own work. License seems incorrect. Earlier removed as copyright violation The Banner (talk) 18:04, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep PD-textlogo. Fry1989 eh? 17:20, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo and in use. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:40, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Derivative/copy of presumed-copyrighted work. ("Poster formed by the assembly of the 12 back covers of the 12 cds provided with the 12 issues of The Pendulum (2000-2001) representing ICP and the Dark Carnival") Ubcule (talk) 18:13, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:40, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This is a screencap from a TV show's official YouTube channel. When the image was uploaded and its license was reviewed, the channel had Creative Commons Attribution license. I was skeptical that a commerical TV show would be licensed like this, so I sent an email to a representative of the YT channel, and they replied that they do not permit the free use of the material and that they have corrected the setting of the channel. The channel doesn't have Creative Commons license anymore. I understand that licenses are irrevocable, but maybe it would be better to delete the image to prevent any possible trouble in the future. This is the only image that I know of from this channel. kyykaarme (talk) 18:30, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- Keep This was verifiably published under a free license by the copyright holder, as confirmed by an image-reviewer. The Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license is irrevocable. They are free to multi-license it under additional licenses, but they can't change their mind about the original release under CC-BY 3.0. Finnusertop (talk) 13:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, per User:Finnusertop. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:42, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Fictional test map, no educational value, out of scope. Only used on a test userpage. See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Ocean912345. P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:51, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jon Kolbert (talk) 20:35, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Alberto Lozano (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Dá Internacional de los Pueblos Indígenas.jpg
- File:Gobernadores de Bastón de Mando, del México de hoy.jpg
- File:Hipólito Arriaga Pote Gobernador nacional.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:21, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:09, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Yup, resolution isn't great because it is taken from a video file. Don't have a high resolution picture of the person that I own, and am creating a Wikipedia page. I have emailed the person and asked for a picture I could use though. IndianPolitics-Bihar (talk) 02:14, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:11, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from newspaper. Should be blanked to keep.
- File:Bracelet for ambassadors tomorrowland.jpg
- File:Ambassador tomorrowland.jpg
- File:Ambassador tomorrowland bracelcelets.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:44, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Comment The second and the third image are broken (incomplete) uploads and so I have deleted them, but I'm not sure about the first (complete) one. The "newspaper" apparently is a magazine in newspaper style for the festival "Tomorrowland", and the leather bracelet shows the same Tomorrowland logo as the magazine. In my opinion, if there's anything copyrightable in the visible part of the magazine, then it's the artistic logo (not the title and not the image/photo which is largely obscured by the person's wrist, COM:DM). However, if the logo is copyrighted, then that applies to its appearance on the bracelet as well, so this would have also to be blanked, leaving us with a not very useful image. So I would lean towards deletion (leaving this to another admin to decide). Gestumblindi (talk) 22:15, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:13, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from non-trivial logo.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:17, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
No information on the photographer of this 3D object, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 20:15, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — Racconish 💬 16:41, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from software screenshot. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:58, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:04, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from license plate. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:03, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- It's just a photo of a sample Oregon salmon plate - though it looks like a photo Deloreanman14 found on some site, rather than a photo he took himself.
- Could *that* have something to do with why it has been nominated? I have never been able to get my head round the rules regarding the uploading of images, which is why I haven't uploaded any myself. Bluebird207 (talk) 20:44, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: Please read COM:DW. Someone drew that salmon, and thus holds a copyright on it. Taking a photograph of the plate does not give the photographer rights to license the salmon, but merely creates a derivative work (i.e., there are two copyrights in this file: 1) the salmon and 2) the photograph of the salmon plate - to license the image freely we must have permission for both, not merely the latter.). --Эlcobbola talk 16:45, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Koiladababu (talk · contribs)
[edit]- Delete while these image were taken by the uploader, Indian stamps are copyright for 60 years from issue date, none of these stamps, on the book or on the envelopes, are issued before 1969. The Philatelic Museum stamp-like label/poster's copyright status is unknown as is its designer. Commons:Derivative works may help the uploader understand the situation. PCP applies.
- File:National Philatelic Museum, Brochure.jpg
- File:National Philatelic Museum, New Delhi (Charkha).jpg
- File:National Philatelic Museum, New Delhi (Stamp of Salt Satyagraha).jpg
- File:National Philatelic Mew Delhi.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Ww2censor (talk) 15:54, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Эlcobbola talk 16:47, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
It seems unlikely that this file is 100% "own work". It's possible that it's a COM:DW of the imagery shown at army.lk/signaller/, but the Sri Lanka Army is claiming copyright over the content on that website. So, unless the original imagery is {{PD-Sri Lanka}} or COM:PD for some other reason or can be verified to have been released under a free license, I don't this this can be kept per COM:PCP. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:07, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ℯxplicit 04:09, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
Seems unlikely to be "own work". It's possible that this might be COM:PD either per {{PD-Sri Lanka}} or some other reason, but not sure. No source is provided, but I did find this archived webpage which appears to show a regimental flag with the same primary imagery. Don't think this should be kept as licensed, and probably cannot be kept per COM:PCP without no more about the original source of the image. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:13, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ℯxplicit 04:09, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
Unlikely to be "own work", but might be a COM:DW of something found elsewhere. Can seem to find this flag anywhere on army.lk, but did find it here where copyright is being claimed by the Sri Lankan Army. So, unless this is too simple to be eligible for copyright protection or is COM:PD for some other reason such as {{PD-Sri Lanka}}, I don't think it can be kept per COM:PCP. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:26, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ℯxplicit 04:09, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
Uploader states "Took a photo from an article" which seems to imply that this is not "own work". No EXIF data provided which might clarify where the image came from, and the primery imagery is licensed as non-free content on English Wikipedia. The image can be seen on this 2013 archived webpage and it's probably also what appeared on this 2009 archived page, but copyright on both pages is being claimed by "ShadowSpear Special Operations". It might be possible for this to be {{PD-Sri Lanka}}, but I don't think it can be otherwise kept per COM:PCP is it's not. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ℯxplicit 04:09, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
In the green license template of the de:Datei:Reddot design award logo.svg file we can read that this image is in the public domain. I wonder if that is true, because shapes aren't as simple to meet the PD-textlogo restrictions. So is there a chance to move the *.svg file to the Commons? Pit rock (talk) 04:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, no pd-textlogo. --Krd 14:03, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
