Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2018/09/22

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

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

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Archive
Archive September 22nd, 2018
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Promotional picture, out of scope Arthur Crbz (talk) 07:36, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: speedily: Spam & screenshot, user page deleted as well, user warned. --Achim (talk) 08:39, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Cropped from https://500px.com/photo/69504847/prac%CC%A7a-da-igreja-do-carmo-diamantina-minas-gerais-brazil-by-eduardo-dias-gontijo Py4nf (talk) 02:58, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Jcb at 10:51, 22 September 2018 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing (F1) - --Krdbot 13:18, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

uploaded by accident, violates copyright (my mistake) Daderot (talk) 13:59, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 15:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

uploaded by accident, violates copyright (my mistake) Daderot (talk) 14:00, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 15:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

与其他文件和页面完全重复 File:Parade in Honour of the Victory in the War of Resistance against Japan 03.jpg Tyg728 (talk) 14:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: COM:INUSE, feel free to nominate the other (uploaded later) file as duplicate. --Sealle (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:16, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:15, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

personal photo in WLM Mmrsafy (talk) 09:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per contest's rules. -- ~ Nahid Talk 06:47, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Flickr-washing. This image was posted online (with another from the same shoot) here on 9 August 2016. The white mark in the upper right corner (see https://imgbox.com/nksbX8uS) suggests that it was taken from a magazine. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:33, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:27, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

I still do not understand the purpose of this page. I was asked to create it. I tried to upload a photo I took but that was deleted. I don't need this page. It serves no purpose. 24.117.194.97 13:25, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: log in and use {{Speedy}} then. --JuTa 07:49, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

This map is incomplete and incorrect. The map of India does not show the state of Jammu and Kashmir as an integral part of Republic of India. Hence it is misleading. 182.59.73.70 18:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: its a user page, not a map. --JuTa 07:52, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright violation. None license of use was presented by the uploader. Leon saudanha (talk) 16:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: No license since 2018-09-17. For more information read the introduction of COM:L, about essential information and about Internet images. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 16:11, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low res duplicate of File:Gensan.jpg. File:Gensan.jpg's watermark can be removed digitally (cropping or digital photoshop) without the need of a duplicate, inferior-quality file like this. JWilz12345 (talk) 03:28, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: and redirected as duplicate. P 1 9 9   15:14, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Bolnitsa (talk · contribs)

[edit]

A batch of unused promotional photos. Depicted are people of questionable notability. Probably out of project scope. Licensing template with OTRS permission created by non-OTRS member.

Sealle (talk) 08:05, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: withdrawn as per a disinterested admin's suggestion. --Sealle (talk) 21:28, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Can't see the word clearly, not a good one B dash (talk) 08:15, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@B dash: why is white text on a transparent background bad? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 09:02, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My computer display is like this. --B dash (talk) 09:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@B dash: that's just what Commons does on file pages, adding a white and grey checkered background. As you see on the right, the image is fine. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 20:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept,  I withdraw my nomination. --B dash (talk) 03:06, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

No indication that the author has been dead for 70 years Aymatth2 (talk) 19:41, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Yann: The photographer could have taken the picture as a 18-year-old apprentice in 1883, then lived past age 82. Or as a 22-year-old, lived past age 86, etc. Unlikely, perhaps, but not wildly implausible. There is significant doubt about whether the image if free. Aymatth2 (talk) 16:52, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Yann: My grandparents were all born in the 19th century. They had relatively comfortable lives, and three of them lived into their eighties. My maternal grandmother was born in 1883 and died in 1973, aged eighty nine. Any photographs or other creative works by any of them would still be covered by copyright. In the case of my grandmother, who painted and wrote poetry, copyright would last until 2043. Aymatth2 (talk) 18:55, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • If my grandmother had been born twenty years earlier, took the picture when she was twenty, and lived as long as she did live, it would be covered by copyright until 2023. This is a plausible scenario. There is significant doubt about whether the image if free. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:43, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. You don't understand what "significant doubt" means. It is not about a particular case, but about the probability that the file would still not be in the public domain. And that probability is very low. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:59, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete In the EU (etc.) you need to know who the creator of a work was or know that the creator is unknown to assume it is public domain. Unless such documentation is provided, we shouldn't be saying it's public domain in its source country and this can't be safely reused unconditionally by people in the EU. Aymatth2 is right. —innotata 17:48, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion: ridiculous request. The image comes from the National Library of France, which asserts that it is in the public domain. If you want to contest the copyright status, write to them. --Yann (talk) 05:37, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused out of COM:SCOPE personal images.

Patrick Rogel (talk) 11:17, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --~MOHEEN (keep talking) 10:27, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Various documents and one logo, not own works. Uncertain copyright, and dubiously in scope.

Yann (talk) 19:44, 20 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 16:35, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Vvvvvvvidal (talk · contribs)

[edit]

All the images uploaded by this user are poorly sourced. One cites Wikipedia as a source while the others are just images found on the Internet.

Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 13:22, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --~MOHEEN (keep talking) 10:27, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Deep059 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:51, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --~MOHEEN (keep talking) 10:28, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files of User:Naharfashionistas

[edit]

Magazine clippings and photos, copyrighted unless there is evidence otherwise. The uploader claims to be the person in the last photo and says it is a photoshoot for a magazine, so unlikely own work, need permission from the photographer. --Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 14:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --~MOHEEN (keep talking) 10:28, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Kawilmagaza (talk · contribs)

[edit]

small resolutions. do not look like own works.

Anatoliy (talk) 20:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --~MOHEEN (keep talking) 11:21, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by SabaFatima123456789 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused out of COM:SCOPE personal images.

Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:43, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --~MOHEEN (keep talking) 11:20, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Poorly cropped (by a bot) version of File:The book of Ser Marco Polo - the Venetian concerning the kingdoms and marvels of the East (1903) (14582831830).jpg. Uninteresting to anyone for any reason. The better version should be cropped if necessary. Broichmore (talk) 11:46, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The cropping was by an Internet Archive project rather than a Commons projects. Refer to Category:Files from Internet Archive Book Images Flickr stream which promotes using Category:Internet Archive (uncrop needed). Try that before raising a DR on in-scope scans of old illustrative images from books thanks.  Keep -- (talk) 11:58, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This file was uploaded incorrectly twice by people not arsed to check what they upload in the first place. On top of that I already uploaded the uncropped version elsewhere. So why apply for uncropping it again. It will now be the same file on the system, twice. Broichmore (talk) 12:08, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: and redirected as duplicate. --JuTa 17:11, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Outside of project scope - this has no conceivable encyclopedic use B (talk) 04:36, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 10:42, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal picture, out of scope. Arthur Crbz (talk) 07:33, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 10:42, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, poor quality, small size. Arthur Crbz (talk) 07:41, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 10:42, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Seedsofmary (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Not free images. One was made by Mickael Tirat (according to fr wiki), one by Didier Rivet and the others are CD cover. Autorizations needed, see Commons:OTRS/fr

Shev123 (talk) 06:56, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:31, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal photo. Solomon203 (talk) 06:37, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:37, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Kotofey2016 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Derivatives of non-free 3D objects.

Sealle (talk) 07:51, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:37, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by NewQi (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Artist Herb Greene is alive and his works are protected by the copyright law. His express written permission is needed to release his works under a free license. The evidence of permission can be provided using COM:OTRS. Please also see [1] and [2] which show no indication of a free license.

4nn1l2 (talk) 09:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by NewQi (talk · contribs)

[edit]

No indication of a free license. http://www.getty.edu/research/library/using/reproductions_permissions/index.html states "Images not in the public domain may be downloaded for personal study, noncommercial use, or for fair use as defined in the United States copyright law." Works uploaded to Wikimedia Commons should be allowed for commercial use. Furthermore, fair use is not allowed. Therefore, permission of rights holder should be obtained to release these works under a free license so that anybody can use them for any purpose in anytime. Evidence of permission can be provided using COM:OTRS.

4nn1l2 (talk) 11:00, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:38, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

unidentified and unusable Amada44  talk to me 12:14, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:39, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope. Photo was only used on Wikidata and the item there got deleted due to lack of notability. Probably used for self-promo based on the username that created the item on Wikidata. Mbch331 (talk) 09:14, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:14, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

My parents can't find out I was in Iraq Katringlosauer (talk) 10:08, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as a courtesy. Officially you are two weeks too late, we normally delete on upload request within 7 days after upload. --Jcb (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

My parents can't find out I was in Iraq Katringlosauer (talk) 10:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as a courtesy. Officially you are two weeks too late, we normally delete on upload request within 7 days after upload. --Jcb (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

My parents can't find out I was in Iraq Katringlosauer (talk) 10:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as a courtesy. Officially you are two weeks too late, we normally delete on upload request within 7 days after upload. --Jcb (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

My parents can't find out I was in Iraq Katringlosauer (talk) 10:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as a courtesy. Officially you are two weeks too late, we normally delete on upload request within 7 days after upload. --Jcb (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

My parents can't find out I was in Iraq Katringlosauer (talk) 10:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as a courtesy. Officially you are two weeks too late, we normally delete on upload request within 7 days after upload. --Jcb (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

My parents can't find out I was in Iraq Katringlosauer (talk) 10:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as a courtesy. Officially you are two weeks too late, we normally delete on upload request within 7 days after upload. --Jcb (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

My parents can't find out I was in Iraq Katringlosauer (talk) 10:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as a courtesy. Officially you are two weeks too late, we normally delete on upload request within 7 days after upload. --Jcb (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

My parents can't find out I was in Iraq Katringlosauer (talk) 10:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as a courtesy. Officially you are two weeks too late, we normally delete on upload request within 7 days after upload. --Jcb (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

My parents can't find out I was in Iraq Katringlosauer (talk) 10:11, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as a courtesy. Officially you are two weeks too late, we normally delete on upload request within 7 days after upload. --Jcb (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal image that I no longer use. Please delete. Thayts (talk) 13:37, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:18, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:15, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:18, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Sheikhinam (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:44, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:18, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:18, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:18, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Vioflesh (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:19, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:19, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:19, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Above COM:TOO. Copyrighted logo. Arthur Crbz (talk) 15:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:19, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

I think this image does meet threshold of orginality to meric copyright. Jarekt (talk) 19:37, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This logo image consists only of simple geometric shapes or text. It does not meet the threshold of originality . Simple text logo, text SpongeBob with points.

Per the United States Copyright Office:

familiar symbols or designs; mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring ... typeface as typefaced are not subject to copyright.

--EEIM (talk) 20:50, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • As one can see, this image is from here, cut and vectorized. It is not redrawn with a different font, it has up to 100% coincidence of graphic elements other than text. And such a complex font itself is subject to copyright.
  • File:SpongeBob SquarePants logo.svg

Everything there, including the points, is part of the font. Fonts have no copyright in the USA. There are only two words here. SpongeBob SQUAREPANTS. The owner is Nickelodeon. The licensing is This logo image consists only of simple geometric shapes or text. It does not meet the threshold of originality. This work includes material that may be protected as a trademark in some jurisdictions. from this web , we can change the source.--EEIM (talk) 09:27, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you use this argument then we could import any image in Commons (including ALL corporate logos): just transform them first to SVG (this can be automated), and build a FONT with it (assign some random letters for monochromatic glyphs, map colors)! Font designs are obviously copyrightable including in the US, if the glyphs are not "mere variations" of "familiar" letters or basic ornementations. However the placement of dots, relative glyph sizes for variation of letters, the choice of color palette, and everything that makes it really unique and clearly identifiable as a reserved trademark, brand or logo means that this image (independantly of the technic used to reproduce it) is effectively subject to copyright.
May be the font used may not be copyrighted (if glyphs have reusable designs and are not intended for a single use), but after all the ASCII alphabet is also not copyrightable, but the assembly of these Latin letters makes texts that ARE copyrightable. This clearly applies here ! This is for the same reason that databases can also be copyrighted even if all their individual components are not (e.g. a geographic database, or the database containing this wiki and this talk page, even if most individual talks like "+1" are free). verdy_p (talk) 17:03, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Conclusion: Delete as this obviously violates copyright and this image (even if it's built by using some free elements) is a unique assembly clearly identifiable as a copyrighted logo. The technics used to reproduce the logo (any other numeric image format, including innovative ones) does NOT matter at all. Only the criteria of originality and identifiability matters (and here this is a high fidelity reproduction of a copyrighted design, recreated and published without permission, so here this is clearly not original to get a new authorship and new licencing term; the claimed PD is an obstinated lie)!
And to the author of this image, @EEIM: , NEVER retry using similar concealing technics, in order to bypass the copyright law: this is a strong failure notice. If you ever retry you'll be subject to sanctions here, for repeated attempts to violate copyrights with repeated false claims that this is only a basic set of letters and simple shapes. So the (worldwide) PD licence is a pure LIE and MUST be removed immediately and adminsitratively (the second licence claim is possible but only for some juridictions, but in fact very few not in Americas and Europe, most parts of Asia and Oceania, except possibly very few countries without working juridictions or not enforcing international copyright law, like Iran, Northern Cyprus, North Korea, Somalia, Yemen, Sudan, South Sudan, or possibly Brunei, Cuba and Venezuela). verdy_p (talk) 17:12, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Companies usually have a simple variant of the main logo. see main logo and simple variant logo Sony Pictures 2004–present, main logo is cc , but the variant logo is simple.

for example the use of a variant: simple, real poster .

See Logos of television programmes of US .--EEIM (talk) 07:32, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: already deleted. (non-admin closure) --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 22:39, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]


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

http://www.bacciguitars.com/portfolio-posts/riccardo-onori/. Besides photographer can't be the person pictured. Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:13, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Il file è di proprietà del soggetto che lo aveva ceduto al sito citato. Ora il proprietario lo ha inserito su Flickr dove ha specificato il copyright. Quindi non c'è nessuna violazione. --Nuvolele (talk) 16:56, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The fact that the subject of the photo has uploaded it to his Flickr account does not say anything about what the photographer allows others to do with this photo. Thuresson (talk) 20:05, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The subject is the owner of the photo. What else? --Nuvolele (talk) 08:16, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete Photographer needs to send permission to COM:OTRS. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 09:43, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: by colleague. --Jcb (talk) 21:19, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Alvinavidornab (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused personal photo. Out of project scope‎.

~MOHEEN (keep talking) 17:37, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:20, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope. Permission has to be sent to COM:OTRS. Yann (talk) 17:43, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:20, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ensayo personal; fuera del alcance del proyecto. Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:02, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 01:39, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ensayo personal; fuera del alcance del proyecto. Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:02, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 01:39, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ensayo personal; fuera del alcance del proyecto. Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:02, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 01:39, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal essay; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:02, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mein Argument für das Hochladen der Datei, die ich als IMG mit dem Ticket 201809211000 noch einmal zur Verfügung gestellt habe war, dass es derzeit noch keine aktuelle Biografie der Künstlerin Eva Bur am Orde gibt. Die anfangs eingestellte Biografie ist unvollständig und - aus meiner Sicht - enthält sie, obwohl sie im Fließtext abgefasst ist stilistische Mängel. Das ist eine Meinung, wie ich einräume (veralteter Stil welcher, welche, welches und ebenda). Da Frau Bur am Orde diese Biografie autorisiert, signiert und zum Einstellen freigegeben hat, sehe ich darin eine Bereicherung für den Artikel Eva Bur am Orde. Dorthin würde ich ihn gerne verschieben. Eine Kategorisierung Eva Bur am Orde wäre wohl richtig.--Nina Eger (talk) 20:47, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 01:39, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal essay; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:03, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 01:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal essay; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:03, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 01:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal essay; out of scope. See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:03, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 01:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Hamza Ben Jelloun (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Vanity photo by banned non-contributing user; see COM:SELFIE.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:19, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 01:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Vanity photo by banned non-contributing user; see COM:SELFIE. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:22, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete - Out of scope - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 11:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 01:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

False date, out of COM:SCOPE (fr:Charlotte Huré). Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 01:37, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate of File:Surallah South Cotabato 1.jpg. Although it might seem this file has a higher resolution, the file history of File:Surallah South Cotabato 1.jpg indicates that the latter was cropped and the original high res version is still intact in the file history. In other words, this file is up for deletion. JWilz12345 (talk) 03:20, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@P199:  : For additional insight.JWilz12345 (talk) 03:21, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete as duplicate. File:Surallah South Cotabato 1.jpg was cropped to remove the big black spot and make it usable for WP. --P 1 9 9   14:55, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:31, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Obviously a derivative work of the copyrighted photos B (talk) 04:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:32, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Derivative work of a number of copyrighted logos B (talk) 04:39, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:32, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Derivative work of the copyrighted map B (talk) 04:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:32, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This file was initially tagged by Patrick Rogel as derivative work without all sources, see
العربية  català  čeština  Deutsch  English  español  hrvatski  italiano  slovenščina  Tiếng Việt  беларуская‎  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  русский  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  فارسی  +/−
Warning sign
This file may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:SPIEGEL-Bestseller vom 15. September 2018.JPG, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!
Mutter Erde (talk) 06:21, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination - I think this is over the line of COM:DM. --Jcb (talk) 11:33, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kircheninnenraum, keine Panoramafreiheit, weniger als 70 Jahre Ginkgo2g (talk) 07:27, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kircheninnenraum, keine Panoramafreiheit, weniger als 70 Jahre Ginkgo2g (talk) 07:28, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kircheninnenraum, keine Panoramafreiheit, weniger als 70 Jahre Ginkgo2g (talk) 07:28, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kircheninnenraum, keine Panoramafreiheit, weniger als 70 Jahre Ginkgo2g (talk) 07:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kircheninnenraum, keine Panoramafreiheit, weniger als 70 Jahre Ginkgo2g (talk) 07:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kircheninnenraum, keine Panoramafreiheit, weniger als 70 Jahre Ginkgo2g (talk) 07:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kircheninnenraum, keine Panoramafreiheit, weniger als 70 Jahre Ginkgo2g (talk) 07:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kircheninnenraum, keine Panoramafreiheit, weniger als 70 Jahre Ginkgo2g (talk) 07:31, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by HombreDHojalata as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: copyright Juan Cancelo 1892-1988
Converted by me to DR to allow for discussion, as other user claims on talkpage "En España, as simples fotografías son de dominio público transcorridos 25 anos da realización da fotografía." -- Túrelio (talk) 07:56, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination - I don't know of such a law in Spain. --Jcb (talk) 11:35, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by HombreDHojalata as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Copyright Luís Casado
Converted by me to DR to allow for discussion, as other user claimed "En España, as simples fotografías son de dominio público transcorridos 25 anos da realización da fotografía." -- Túrelio (talk) 07:57, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination - I don't know of such a law in Spain. --Jcb (talk) 11:36, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Uploader's vita, copied from https://people.bayt.com/profile-profile-51352679/, out of project scope. Achim (talk) 08:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:37, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal picture, not used Arthur Crbz (talk) 08:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

dear sir, can you please tell why it is put in deletion requests --Pranavs17 (talk) 08:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pranavs17: You should read the following page: COM:SELFIE. Personal pictures can't be uploaded on Wikimedia Commons, unless it's used on a Wikimedia Project...
Plus, you are unlikely to be the author of this picture. We need permission fromthe photographer to release this file under a free license. See COM:OTRS. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 10:01, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Arthur Crbz:

I'm extremely sorry sir, i apologize for this mistake. henceforth i will see through it that i wont repeat this kind of blunders. please excuse me for this. its better to delete this file --Pranavs17 (talk) 10:05, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per uploader request. @Pranavs17: No problem :) Don't hesitate to contact me if you have any question about Wikimedia Commons. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 10:18, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

the image is only fair use - loaded in error Victuallers (talk) 10:35, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Official document. Proper license tag should be used if it's in public domain. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:41, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of image. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:44, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unclear source. this page tends to show that it's not really an extract from a Méliès film, but a photograph that may be copyrighted. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:19, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:39, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

This does not look like an "own work". Looks like it's been found on the Internet where 100s of similar Tyagaraja portraits can be found. —Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 15:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:39, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Incorrect use of the user page, deleted content from Spanish Wikipedia was added here because it is promotional. ProtoplasmaKid (talk) 15:44, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:39, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

copyrighted elsewhere, uploaded by mistake of owner PopularOutcast talk2me! 15:47, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:40, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Possibly above COM:TOO. Arthur Crbz (talk) 15:47, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:40, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copytight violation of Monitorapp, Inc Yanjipy (talk) 16:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Maybe PD-textlogo, but apparently out of scope. --Jcb (talk) 11:41, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Look pretty much out of scope to me. Pleae dont forget the redirect File:Nena dhe vajza e saj.jpg JuTa 17:51, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:41, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

A part of image derived from File:Batong2.jpeg and deleted due to copyright problem. Suggest to be replaced by File:Wikipedia_Patroller4.svg. Xiplus (talk) 07:12, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination and redirected as suggested. --Sealle (talk) 17:19, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Is the same as File:Straatbeelden, buurten, armoedig, bevolking, Bestanddeelnr 252-9283.jpg; but the other one is sharper JopkeB (talk) 07:10, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: marked as duplicate. --Sealle (talk) 17:29, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW of copyrighted artwork by Alicia Carletti (d. 2017), missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 11:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 17:32, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

По запросу автора Dockawai (talk) 17:55, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken this photo and Dockawai isn't me --Butko (talk) 13:42, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Sealle (talk) 17:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

По запросу автора Dockawai (talk) 17:58, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as requested. --Sealle (talk) 17:39, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal image with no encyclopedic value. Also its just 121 KB, may not an original work. KCVelaga (talk · mail) 18:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 17:38, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
English: The architect Antoine Sartorio (1885-1988) died less than 70 years ago. The monument is not in the public domain yet (and no freedom of panorama in France). These images can not be put under a free license.
Français : L'architecte Antoine Sartorio (1885-1988) est mort il y a moins de 70 ans. Ce monument n'est pas encore dans le domaine public (et il n'y a pas de liberté de panorama en France). Ces images ne peuvent donc pas être placées sous licence libre.

VIGNERON (talk) 15:37, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 19:58, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-encyclopedic, no apparent value. Till (talk) 20:12, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 20:06, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looks the same as File:Mandenmakerij, Bestanddeelnr 256-1540.jpg. JopkeB (talk) 06:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 20:45, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Tis is a partial of file:The book of Ser Marco Polo - the Venetian concerning the kingdoms and marvels of the East (1903) (14767223334).jpg. Its an error in bot uploading and and should be deleted. Its redundant Broichmore (talk) 11:15, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep We have the folded and unfolded page. Seeing exactly how the map folds up is interesting and is in scope. If you want to fully uncrop an image, remember that Faebot is set up to make it easy. -- (talk) 11:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We have the book and it has the "folded" image in it. What's the category here? "Folded maps". I'm waiting for the idiot to pop up here to claim, they'll be using it in a forthcoming article of "How to fold maps in books". And by the way, we did not have the full version since the three years this was uploaded till I put it there, today. Broichmore (talk) 11:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted, pre Broichmore. Taivo (talk) 20:53, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Iñaki LL (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Source (YouTube) does not provide any suitable license. Unless a proper source with suitable license is provided, there's no reason to believe these videos may remain in commons

Discasto talk 22:12, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Other videos (such as this and this) have been already deleted. As the uploader is complaining, possibly not in a proper way (@Hedwig in Washington: ), it would be nice to have a second opinion and clarify the status of these videos. --Discasto talk 22:17, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A complete waste of time, it is very well specified here [3], there is no reason why we should believe that the youtube channel with the same name as the page should be the source and have a restrictive license. Nonsense. All the information is there, so please restore it. I added additional info on Hedwig in Washington's talk. Iñaki LL (talk) 22:46, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but it's a waste of time created by you. Provide a proper source (not one without licensing information), do it in the file description and not in random admins' talk pages, include {{LicenseReview}} and, voilà, no more waste of time. It's a pity you keep on making the rest of the community waste their time. --Discasto talk 23:24, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination Sources have been provided and license reviewed. See here. --Discasto talk 18:26, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept per nom. Strakhov (talk) 22:18, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Iñaki LL (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Commons:Derivative works from song and/or non-trivial background.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:47, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 08:33, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

дубль File:35 - Гора Пихтовая.jpg Alexandronikos (talk) 11:37, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:32, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

дубль File:21 - Гора Пихтовая 548,0 м.jpg Alexandronikos (talk) 11:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:37, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

дубль File:11 - Гора Пихтовая 548,0 м.jpg Alexandronikos (talk) 11:39, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:38, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Сомнения в авторстве и лицензии: фото 1975 года, оцифрована в наше время, маленький размер файла, необходимо подтверждение в OTRS от автора Dogad75 (talk) 13:28, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:40, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Сомнения в авторстве и лицензии: фото 1975 года, оцифрована в наше время, маленький размер файла, необходимо подтверждение в OTRS от автора Dogad75 (talk) 13:28, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:40, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Сомнения в авторстве и лицензии: фото 1975 года, оцифрована в наше время, маленький размер файла, необходимо подтверждение в OTRS от автора Dogad75 (talk) 13:29, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:40, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Сомнения в авторстве и лицензии: фото в молодые годы, дата указана в наше время, автор фота и лицо на снимке-одно и тоже лицо, необходимо подтверждение в OTRS от автора Dogad75 (talk) 13:32, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:40, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Нарушение авторских прав от автора книги, неизвестен автор обложки, производная от автора обложки. Необходимо подтверждение в OTRS от автора обложки Dogad75 (talk) 18:22, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:41, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Сомнения в авторстве и лицензии: на фото персоне не 85 лет, фото сделано в давних временах и оцифровано в наше время, фотограф снимка, скорее всего, неизвестно. необходимо подтверждение в OTRS Dogad75 (talk) 18:41, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:41, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Сомнения в авторстве и лицензии: фото в 1985 году, автор, скорее всего неизвестен, оцифрована в наше время. Необходимо подтверждение в OTRS Dogad75 (talk) 19:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:42, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Сомнение в авторстве и лицензии: фото встречается в Интернете до загрузки до Викисклада <http://berkovich-zametki.com/2008/Zametki/Nomer11/Dumesh1.php>. Необходимо подтверждение в OTRS от автора фото. Dogad75 (talk) 19:28, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:42, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Сомнения в авторстве и лицензии: фото в 2000 году, автор, скорее всего неизвестен, оцифрована в наше время. Необходимо подтверждение в OTRS Dogad75 (talk) 19:44, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:43, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Сомнения в авторстве и лицензии: фото в 2003 году, автор, малого размера файла, нет метаданных, скорее всего неизвестен, оцифрована в наше время. Необходимо подтверждение в OTRS Dogad75 (talk) 19:55, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:43, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Сомнения и в лицензии: фото встречается в Интернете до загрузки до Википедии <http://e-wiki.org/ru/images/Московский_физико-технический_институт_мфти#images-8>. Необходимо подтверждение от фотографа в OTRS Dogad75 (talk) 19:58, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:43, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Неизвестны автор, дата создания и дата правомерно обнародованного фото. Dogad75 (talk) 22:15, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:44, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Создание даты фото неизвестна, автор неизвестен, дата обнародования неизвестна. Удалить. Dogad75 (talk) 22:22, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 15:44, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Looks the same as
Mandenmakerij, Bestanddeelnr 256-1540
JopkeB (talk) 06:42, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: not exact duplicate. Ruthven (msg) 16:09, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

ticket:2017031210011731 is invalid. It does e.g. not contain a specific license. It's not really clear to which files the ticket is supposed to apply, but it is stated that they are the author of only a part of the pictures. @Pallerti:

Jcb (talk) 06:46, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • You have access to that absurdly secret outfit — you tell us why do you think Urbán Tamás’ pants are on fire. And after that we’ll see who’s to be trusted: You, with your tattered reputation, or a renown Hungarian photographer. -- Tuválkin 00:36, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure, I’ll stop — when you stop attempting to delete, based on licensing pretexts, files that are properly licensed. Insult me all you like — keeping these photos in Commons is more important to me than trying to avoid you is. -- Tuválkin 07:16, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep @Jcb: Would you have nominate to deletion these pictures if OTRS template had not been there? Source page contains the licence. Tamás Urbán sent e-mail to OTRS only because to confirmed this licence. If you think the ticket is not valid, delete the ticket not these pictures. --Regasterios (talk) 12:25, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep A jegy érvényes. Urbán Tamás neve alatt rengeteg fotó van a Fortepanon. Mivel a Fortepananon több olyan kép is szabad licenc alatt van, amely nem jogosan lett szabad licenc alá helyezve, Urbán Tamás -- érdeklődésünkre -- elmondta, hogy igen, azok az ő képei, kivéve az első világháborúsokat, mert azokat csak gyűjtötte. A beküldött engedély annak alátámasztása, hogy valóban ő engedélyezte (adta) a képeit szabad licenc alatt a Fortepannak. Érdekes momentum, hogy Jcb csak azokat jelölte törlésre, amiken már kint van, hogy a szerzőjük alátámasztotta, hogy igen, az övéi, és igen, ő adta a Fortepannak szabad licenc alatt, de azokat nem jelölte törlésre, amelyek ugyanúgy a Fortepanról származnak, de nincs rajtuk OTRS-sablon. Ha azok a képek törlendőek, amelyeknél a szerző biztosított minket arról, hogy azok az ő képei, valóban ő adta szabad licenc alatt a Fortepannak, ahonnan mindenféle kontroll nélkül kerültek át a képek, akkor legyen minden, Fortepanról származó kép (kivéve ahol a szerző a szükséges időn túl halt meg) is törölve, hiszen azoknál még biztosíték sincs arra, hogy valóban ők engedélyezték a képeik megjelenését szabad licenc alatt. Hungarikusz Firkász (talk) 14:22, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • While this is an interesting exposé, it doesn’t affect the matter of this DR: The licensing made by Urbán Tamás is clear and correct; Fortepan was just the vessel to get these photos online at a given moment: The release was made not for Fortepan, but (as preconized by its own standard text) to the worldwide general public. -- Tuválkin 07:16, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep The permission is certainly valid, the DR is unsubstantiated. Fortepan is well know for its unreliability: even though the photos are published under free, CCBYSA licence, it has been found in several cases that they in fact do not have permission from the authors, therefore uploading photos from Fortepan without permission is not recommended. Fortepan refused to discuss clarification of the situation, therefore, in many cases, editors of Wikipedia asked permission in writing from the authors of the photos, like from Tamás Urbán. Tamás Urbán has confirmed in writing that he had authorized publishing of the photos under free licence. This permission is recorded under ticket number 2017031210011731. The correspondance went in Hungarian, so I have doubts if user JCB is in command of Hungarian language, and they may not understand the precize contents of the correspondance rendered by Google translate. --Pallerti (talk) 10:18, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Note to closing admin - only close this after coordination with the investigation from OTRS site, see here - Jcb (talk) 10:39, 29 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Fortepan is a popular website in Hungary, which collects old, archive photos of the country. If somebody upload a photo there, accept the terms and conditions of the website, including 1) they have the right to publish the photo, 2) they publish it under CC-BY-SA 3.0. The situation is the same as it is on Flickr or other image collecting or media hosting sites, and common practice of Wikimedia Commons, that if the external site indicate a free licence for a file, than (if there is no doubt) Commons accepts this permission after a review process, which only checks if the claimed permission is the same on the external site as well. Therefore if we accepted images from Fortepan without any extra efforts, it would be in line with the rules and common practice. Compared to this, in this case Hungarikusz Firkász wrote an email directly to the author, because he is a well-know photographer. His photos are publicly available and it would have been possible that somebody else collected his photos and uploaded to Fortepan without the consent of the author. The answer we received from the author in ticket 2017031210011731 confirms the followings: 1) he is the author of the photos, 2) he uploaded (sent) the photos to Fortepan, 3) he agrees and accepts the free license of Fortepan (which is CC-BY-SA 3.0 for all images). This statement, together with the legal terms of Fortepan is enough to be sure, that these images have a real and valid permission (on Fortepan), and we (or anybody) can legally use the images under the indicated CC-BY-SA 3.0 license. Regards, Samat (talk) 13:13, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per Samat and Krd + discussion. Ruthven (msg) 16:00, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

non-free image, taken from the ESPN Cricinfo site (per the link for source!) Lugnuts (talk) 08:14, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 16:10, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate. Ketil3 (talk) 10:07, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: duplicate of what? @Ketil3:  please use {{Duplicate}} if you want to propose it again for deletion. Ruthven (msg) 16:11, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate of a crop. Just delete it. Ketil3 (talk) 10:11, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't feed the troll! This request was obviously taken with the intention of provoking. Look at the discussion page of the user, that explains everything. MagentaGreen (talk) 12:01, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion: duplicate of what? @Ketil3:  please use {{Duplicate}} if you want to propose it again for deletion. Ruthven (msg) 16:12, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate. Ketil3 (talk) 10:12, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't feed the troll! This request was obviously taken with the intention of provoking. Look at the discussion page of the user, that explains everything. MagentaGreen (talk) 12:02, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Ruthven (msg) 16:12, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

photo resulation is not good Apuranta (talk) 13:32, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: 4 128 × 2 322 pixel seems good enough to me!. Ruthven (msg) 16:13, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 16:14, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

fabricated depiction, misleading. Jaydayal (talk) 14:36, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. @Jaydayal: use {{Fictitious flag}} instead. Ruthven (msg) 16:15, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyvio(https://m.facebook.com/AmethiaRajput/photos/a.372893083237682/373345026525821/?type=3&source=54&ref=page_internal) Heba Aisha (talk) 01:59, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by Taivo. ---akko (talk) 02:33, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

This map is incorrect. It does not show the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir which is an integral part of India. 182.59.73.70 18:46, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion. Ruthven (msg) 16:31, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Incorrect map of a historical kingdom and the existing sources don't support the boundary depicted here. Areas which were parts of other kingdoms (like Pala empire) during this time have been depicted as part of Kamrup kingdom in this map. There is a link given (which doesn't look reliable at all) even doesn't support the map.) Za-ari-masen (talk) 10:46, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Speedy keep: This is the traditional boundary of Kamarupa as produced from an authoritative text, and reproduced in a PhD thesis. The map has been geo-referenced. The claim that the existing sources do not support this map is false. The boundaries have fluctuated considerably during the historical period and the claim of the Pala Empire is not relevant here. Chaipau (talk) 22:34, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep: This file is in use on Wikipedia articles from as:অসমৰ ইতিহাস to ta:அசாம் வரலாறு, and on Kamarupa (Q1194765). Under COM:NPOV, used files are not eligible for deletion just because they're inaccurate. If this file is accurate enough for twelve Wikipedias, it's accurate enough for Commons. --bjh21 (talk) 11:07, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

'Kept per above and previous; in use in multiple projects. (Uploading of better alternative free licensed maps is welcome.) -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 13:19, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Vanity photo by banned non-contributing user; see COM:SELFIE. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 16:31, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Correct vector image is created. --Kwasura (talk) 11:51, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Better svg file exists (File:Finnish air force roundel 1934-1945 border.svg). The swastika has also a wrong shade of blue in this one. According to Finnish book about the warpaint of the FAF (Keskinen, Kalevi; Stenman, Kari: Sotamaalaus, Suomen ilmavoimien historia 23. ISBN 951-98751-6-6), the shade of blue should be Federal Standard 595 FS15123 which is used on the Finnish air force roundel 1934-1945 border.svg. --Msaynevirta (talk) 19:36, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: In use, cannot be deleted for these reasons. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:41, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not in use no more. --Kwasura (talk) 13:33, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: again. --JuTa 23:20, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Inferior duplicate of the File:Finnish air force roundel 1934-1945 border.svg Kwasura (talk) 17:32, 14 September 2018 (UTC) Kwasura (talk) 19:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 16:32, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of project scope: personal document, unused, promotional 4nn1l2 (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 16:32, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Derivative work of a copyrighted menu and photo. Everything that isn't copyrighted is outside project scope - the back of someone's head has no encyclopedic use B (talk) 12:24, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 15:52, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Загружен по ошибке. Быстрое удаление. Раиса Морозова (talk) 12:58, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 12:11, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file will not be in the public domain in its home country until January 1, 2039 Coldcreation (talk) 21:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Agree Uploader should locally host it on English Wikipedia since it is public domain in the US, but won't be PD in France until 2039. Abzeronow (talk) 15:50, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 20:25, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Derivative work of Paramount's content. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:25, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What are you basing this claim on ? Can you provide a link to the original photo at Paramount's website? WikiJunkie (talk) 06:40, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm basing it on the fact that it clearly says Paramount on the image. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:46, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Those 1940s Superman cartoons are PD-US-not renewed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abzeronow (talk • contribs) 15:59, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Proof? Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:46, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Gizmodo article mentions they are public domain https://io9.gizmodo.com/5963049/you-can-now-watch-the-1940s-fleischer-studios-superman-cartoons-online . Also the English Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman_(1940s_cartoons) Abzeronow (talk) 19:58, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yet oddly the Youtube videos in that article have been DMCA'd. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:15, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Cartoon Brew was source for that Gizmodo article. Said that Warner Brothers had uploaded those videos (they have rights to original negatives) https://www.cartoonbrew.com/classic/warners-posts-1940s-fleischer-superman-cartoons-online-73590.html#disqus_thread. Could be that WB took down their own videos. En.wikipedia cites a book when they say it's public domain. I'm open to the possibility that internet and Wikipedia have the wrong info (in which case, it would only become free in 2039 since cartoon could be one of the 1943 ones), but haven't seen evidence that the cartoons themselves are still in copyright either Abzeronow (talk) 17:22, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per discussion (public domain cartoons), also the title card itself might not be eligible for copyright (PD-Text, I'd say, even if the "Paramount" and "Superman" letterings/logos might be trademarked, but that's a different issue). --Gestumblindi (talk) 20:29, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Uploader is himself depicted person. I suspect not own work, but photographer's copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 11:06, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 22:16, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image has text "Political ad paid by commitee to elect Caroline Fayard". In my opinion the commitee is copyright holder and the uploader cannot publish it under any license. OTRS-permission is needed. Taivo (talk) 11:15, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 22:15, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small photo without metadata, uploader has very few contributions. Maybe uploader isn't photographer, but violates his copyright. OTRS-permission is needed. Taivo (talk) 11:18, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 22:15, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Suspected copyright violation: professional looking work but low resolution and minimal EXIF. Only contribution by uploader. MKFI (talk) 12:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 22:14, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

No real sourcing is provided. Pic is quite likely a copyright violation and should be deleted ASAP. SNUGGUMS (talk) 21:35, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 22:12, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

I have read in de:Madame d’Ora that she lived between 1927-1946 in Paris, France, so this self portrait of 1929 is probably a copyright violation Mutter Erde (talk) 16:59, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Undelete in 2034. Abzeronow (talk) 20:02, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per discussion. Strakhov (talk) 20:50, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Geringe Auflösung. José A. Sánchez Penzo (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Slightly wider crop in much higher resolution available at File:Ratingen, Pfarrkirche, Peter und Paul, Teilansicht-Nordfassade.jpg, so deleting this version as uploader's request (as it was shortly after your upload, you could also have nominated it for speedy deletion with {{SD|G7}}). --Gestumblindi (talk) 17:12, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Geringe Auflösung. José A. Sánchez Penzo (talk) 14:50, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Reason for deletion is "small resolution"; although the resolution isn't too small in my opinion and I don't see a version with higher resolution of that image here, I'll treat this as a case equivalent to a {{SD|G7}}), as uploader nominated the file for deletion the same day. --Gestumblindi (talk) 17:16, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

No source. No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 15:57, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 17:17, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Derivative work of copyrighted advertisement. MKFI (talk) 12:50, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. — Racconish💬 15:36, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

Taken from https://richmondfirst.ca/board-of-education-trustees/elsa-wong-chinese-bio/, clearly not "own work" RoySmith (talk) 16:44, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This photo is a self portrait obtained from Elsa Wong. She indicated that this was a photo she submitted to Richmond First Voters Society and was used on their website. Capba (talk) 22:12, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination - no permission. — Racconish💬 15:38, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

No source. No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 20:59, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. — Racconish💬 15:38, 9 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

not covered by FoP in Brazil, see COM:FOP Brazil, as the artwork isn't allowed to deteach from its surrounding (as this is in this clipart). Therefore, while its not in PD yet, this ClipArt is a copyright violation in Brazil. Quedel (talk) 09:11, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:11, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This presumably German photo (it shows a German politician) is said to be pre-1933 and claimed to be in the PD. The photographer is said to be "unknown". The source given is scan of a photo.

If we want to keep this file, we need more information. A ca. 1933 photo is not old enough to assume that the photograph must be in the PD anyway, since the photographer easily could have lived beyond 1947 - which by the usual 70 years pma formula would mean the photograph is still protected by copyright.

"I do not know the photographer" also does not mean that the photographer is actually "unknown". The claim that the photographer is "unknown" isn't applicable to German works anyway, since German law says that pre-1995 anonymous works are only really anonymous if the author (here: the photographer) was never publicly disclosed anywhere, not even in a lecture or similar. One cannot prove that, so pre-1995 "anonymous" works from Germany are not suitable for Commons (or de.wp).

This means that the file should be deleted per the precautionary principle, unless new information is presented that shows the photo is clearly in the PD or under a free license. Rosenzweig τ 10:01, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:11, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No using, also false copyright template because the statement only for "documents", not image minhhuy (talk) 10:07, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:12, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Does Commons:Freedom of panorama in source country allow this? EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Question Well, what is the source country? The paper man is reading a Swedish newspaper, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the photo was taken in Sweden. Gestumblindi (talk) 17:04, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:13, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]


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

Who is Pallava Narayanan Kanhangad? Dated to 2 days before the upload? Is the uploader the artist? Also, bad AR. —Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 16:50, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Pallav narayanan Kanhangad is a painter. The painting was photographed and uploaded by me. if this is against the rules, then it may be deleted.
  • Thanks. Vijayan Rajapuram(വിജയന്‍ രാജപുരം) 17:03, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
    • I'm not fully clear about the licensing of a photograph taken by you of a recent work of art. You can also see bits of the frame as well as the garland. This might no longer be a 2D work of art. Let's see what the mods say. BTW, is that a weird crop or is it the angle that's wonky?—Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 18:09, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:14, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This image is copyroghted by Arthur Cavalieri as seen in http://www.informepolicial.com/giro/YUhSMGNEb3ZMM1psYW1FdVlXSnlhV3d1WTI5dExtSnlMM0J2YkdsMGFXTmhMMlY0TFdkdmRtVnlibUZrYjNJdFpHOHRjbWx2TFdkaGNtOTBhVzVvYnkxbExYQnlaWE52TFhCbGJHRXRjR1l2 Paladinum2 (talk) 18:22, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ola apenas usei a imagem para colocar na pagina do garotinho peço desculpas nao sou o autor da imagem — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathan Josef (talk • contribs) 19:39, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:14, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No information on the photographer of this 3D object, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 20:52, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is my own photo, I've made it and uploaded. MaxiMaxiMax (talk) 01:24, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Maximaximax: Please fill in the information template and add a license for the picture. Jcb (talk) 14:26, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:15, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No source. No information on the photographer of this 3D object, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 20:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:15, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Bogus license. Jcb (talk) 20:58, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Refining information file. It is OK? --Jiří Nedas (talk) 13:00, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't think so. Are you really claiming that you took this picture back in 1949? Seems highly unlikely to me. Permission has to come from the (heirs of the) photographer, unless the photographer would have died before 1948, which is inpossible if they took a picture in 1949. Jcb (talk) 13:09, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
František Jelínek is my grandfather. The photo comes from a family album. The direct heirs are my mother and aunt whose permission I received. If there is anything else to do, please let me know. Thank you.--Jiří Nedas (talk) 12:34, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't know who the photographer was, I think there is nothing you can do. Jcb (talk) 14:41, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:16, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Insufficient source information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 21:40, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 17:16, 10 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not a Czech bramboráček at all. Typical czech bramborák/bramboráček is flat round where potatoes are the main ingredients. Raw, not fried yet, bramboráček is so sparse, it can't hold its shape. Google images of "bramboráčky" from ".cz" (i.e. excluding this ones) Kmarty (talk) 12:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The closest one with what is showed on pictures "Bramboráček ([1-7]).JPG" could be "bramborové šišky"("potato cones"), Mohnnudel or Gnocchi. But all of them are usually boiled, not fried. Kmarty (talk) 12:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all of you, firstly I do not really understand why the image is proposed to be deleted. Even if the name of the picture would be consider as a misleading (which is not as I will show later), it is appropriate just rename it, not to delete it.
About the name. In Czech is a quite common that several different thinks has the same name and it depends on the context. This type of bread is really called "bramboráček" because the dough from which it is made contains potatoes. However, this does not mean that it is the same thing as the "bramborák" which is mentioned above. The procedure of the preparation is different, but both thinks share the same name. Therefore the problem is that the category mix up together also the different type and that is wrongly linked to Wikipedia projects. Regards --Chmee2 (talk) 13:14, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have nothing about renaming. But, as a Czech, this is the first and only appearance of potato bread called "bramboráček" (I believe this is only some strictly local thing). On every place of Czechia if you say "bramboráček/bramboráčky"(singular/plural), everybody thinks about small form of "bramborák/bramboráky" which is definitely not this one. Placing this picture as a "typical czech bramboráček/bramboráčky" is really misleading. Kmarty (talk) 13:37, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
BTW renaming/deleting proposal. I found only "deleting proposal" hence I select this one. So it doesn't mean I want these pictures has to be deleted, I'd only like to remove that mislead. And this one is quite big (local naming vs wide spread naming). Kmarty (talk) 13:48, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
See also

All related deletion requests.

Tento projekt nesplňuje požadavky pro smazání !!!!!!!!
Nápověda
Category:Smažené bramborové krokety sypané směsí
Dobré obrázky
Pokročilé...
Z projektu Wikimedia Commons
Skočit na navigaciSkočit na vyhledávání
Smažené bramborové krokety sypané směsí. Místní specialita prodávaná na trhu nebo v rychlém občerstvení. Prodejní název je :Bramboráček. Oficiání podniková norma pro neznámou pekárnu. Česká stání norma má název Bramborák. Zdrobnělina pro státní :normu je nepřípustná. Jedná se tak vždy o podnikovou normu nebo místní název pro tento výrobek. Tento výrobek nemusí :splňovat ČSN pro Bramborák. Ani podle názvu nebo složení. Czech Republic.
Název je oficiální. S pozdravem Pohled 111.Pohled 111 --Pohled 111 (talk) 16:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

--Pohled 111 (talk) 16:23, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: If there is a problem with the file names, don't propose deletion, but work together to move the files to fitting filenames and into a separate category if appropriate. --Rosenzweig τ 18:41, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not a Czech bramboráček at all. Typical czech bramborák/bramboráček is flat round where potatoes are the main ingredients. Raw, not fried yet, bramboráček is so sparse, it can't hold its shape. Google images of "bramboráčky" from ".cz" (i.e. excluding this ones) Kmarty (talk) 12:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The closest one with what is showed on pictures "Bramboráček ([1-7]).JPG" could be "bramborové šišky"("potato cones"), Mohnnudel or Gnocchi. But all of them are usually boiled, not fried. Kmarty (talk) 12:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all of you, firstly I do not really understand why the image is proposed to be deleted. Even if the name of the picture would be consider as a misleading (which is not as I will show later), it is appropriate just rename it, not to delete it.
About the name. In Czech is a quite common that several different thinks has the same name and it depends on the context. This type of bread is really called "bramboráček" because the dough from which it is made contains potatoes. However, this does not mean that it is the same thing as the "bramborák" which is mentioned above. The procedure of the preparation is different, but both thinks share the same name. Therefore the problem is that the category mix up together also the different type and that is wrongly linked to Wikipedia projects. Regards --Chmee2 (talk) 13:14, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have nothing about renaming. But, as a Czech, this is the first and only appearance of potato bread called "bramboráček" (I believe this is only some strictly local thing). On every place of Czechia if you say "bramboráček/bramboráčky"(singular/plural), everybody thinks about small form of "bramborák/bramboráky" which is definitely not this one. Placing this picture as a "typical czech bramboráček/bramboráčky" is really misleading. Kmarty (talk) 13:38, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Tento projekt nesplňuje požadavky pro smazání !!!!!!!!
Nápověda
Category:Smažené bramborové krokety sypané směsí
Dobré obrázky
Pokročilé...
Z projektu Wikimedia Commons
Skočit na navigaciSkočit na vyhledávání
Smažené bramborové krokety sypané směsí. Místní specialita prodávaná na trhu nebo v rychlém občerstvení. Prodejní název je :Bramboráček. Oficiání podniková norma pro neznámou pekárnu. Česká stání norma má název Bramborák. Zdrobnělina pro státní :normu je nepřípustná. Jedná se tak vždy o podnikovou normu nebo místní název pro tento výrobek. Tento výrobek nemusí :splňovat ČSN pro Bramborák. Ani podle názvu nebo složení. Czech Republic.
Název je oficiální. S pozdravem Pohled 111.Pohled 111 --Pohled 111 (talk) 16:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

--Pohled 111 (talk) 16:19, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: If there is a problem with the file names, don't propose deletion, but work together to move the files to fitting filenames and into a separate category if appropriate. --Rosenzweig τ 18:41, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not a Czech bramboráček at all. Typical czech bramborák/bramboráček is flat round where potatoes are the main ingredients. Raw, not fried yet, bramboráček is so sparse, it can't hold its shape. Google images of "bramboráčky" from ".cz" (i.e. excluding this ones) Kmarty (talk) 12:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The closest one with what is showed on pictures "Bramboráček ([1-7]).JPG" could be "bramborové šišky"("potato cones"), Mohnnudel or Gnocchi. But all of them are usually boiled, not fried. Kmarty (talk) 12:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all of you, firstly I do not really understand why the image is proposed to be deleted. Even if the name of the picture would be consider as a misleading (which is not as I will show later), it is appropriate just rename it, not to delete it.
About the name. In Czech is a quite common that several different thinks has the same name and it depends on the context. This type of bread is really called "bramboráček" because the dough from which it is made contains potatoes. However, this does not mean that it is the same thing as the "bramborák" which is mentioned above. The procedure of the preparation is different, but both thinks share the same name. Therefore the problem is that the category mix up together also the different type and that is wrongly linked to Wikipedia projects. Regards --Chmee2 (talk) 13:14, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have nothing about renaming. But, as a Czech, this is the first and only appearance of potato bread called "bramboráček" (I believe this is only some strictly local thing). On every place of Czechia if you say "bramboráček/bramboráčky"(singular/plural), everybody thinks about small form of "bramborák/bramboráky" which is definitely not this one. Placing this picture as a "typical czech bramboráček/bramboráčky" is really misleading. Kmarty (talk) 13:39, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Tento projekt nesplňuje požadavky pro smazání !!!!!!!!
Nápověda
Category:Smažené bramborové krokety sypané směsí
Dobré obrázky
Pokročilé...
Z projektu Wikimedia Commons
Skočit na navigaciSkočit na vyhledávání
Smažené bramborové krokety sypané směsí. Místní specialita prodávaná na trhu nebo v rychlém občerstvení. Prodejní název je :Bramboráček. Oficiání podniková norma pro neznámou pekárnu. Česká stání norma má název Bramborák. Zdrobnělina pro státní :normu je nepřípustná. Jedná se tak vždy o podnikovou normu nebo místní název pro tento výrobek. Tento výrobek nemusí :splňovat ČSN pro Bramborák. Ani podle názvu nebo složení. Czech Republic.
Název je oficiální. S pozdravem Pohled 111.Pohled 111 --Pohled 111 (talk) 16:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

--Pohled 111 (talk) 16:20, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: If there is a problem with the file names, don't propose deletion, but work together to move the files to fitting filenames and into a separate category if appropriate. --Rosenzweig τ 18:42, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not a Czech bramboráček at all. Typical czech bramborák/bramboráček is flat round where potatoes are the main ingredients. Raw, not fried yet, bramboráček is so sparse, it can't hold its shape. Google images of "bramboráčky" from ".cz" (i.e. excluding this ones) Kmarty (talk) 12:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The closest one with what is showed on pictures "Bramboráček ([1-7]).JPG" could be "bramborové šišky"("potato cones"), Mohnnudel or Gnocchi. But all of them are usually boiled, not fried. Kmarty (talk) 12:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all of you, firstly I do not really understand why the image is proposed to be deleted. Even if the name of the picture would be consider as a misleading (which is not as I will show later), it is appropriate just rename it, not to delete it.
About the name. In Czech is a quite common that several different thinks has the same name and it depends on the context. This type of bread is really called "bramboráček" because the dough from which it is made contains potatoes. However, this does not mean that it is the same thing as the "bramborák" which is mentioned above. The procedure of the preparation is different, but both thinks share the same name. Therefore the problem is that the category mix up together also the different type and that is wrongly linked to Wikipedia projects. Regards --Chmee2 (talk) 13:14, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have nothing about renaming. But, as a Czech, this is the first and only appearance of potato bread called "bramboráček" (I believe this is only some strictly local thing). On every place of Czechia if you say "bramboráček/bramboráčky"(singular/plural), everybody thinks about small form of "bramborák/bramboráky" which is definitely not this one. Placing this picture as a "typical czech bramboráček/bramboráčky" is really misleading. Kmarty (talk) 13:39, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Tento projekt nesplňuje požadavky pro smazání !!!!!!!!
Nápověda
Category:Smažené bramborové krokety sypané směsí
Dobré obrázky
Pokročilé...
Z projektu Wikimedia Commons
Skočit na navigaciSkočit na vyhledávání
Smažené bramborové krokety sypané směsí. Místní specialita prodávaná na trhu nebo v rychlém občerstvení. Prodejní název je :Bramboráček. Oficiání podniková norma pro neznámou pekárnu. Česká stání norma má název Bramborák. Zdrobnělina pro státní :normu je nepřípustná. Jedná se tak vždy o podnikovou normu nebo místní název pro tento výrobek. Tento výrobek nemusí :splňovat ČSN pro Bramborák. Ani podle názvu nebo složení. Czech Republic.
Název je oficiální. S pozdravem Pohled 111.Pohled 111--Pohled 111 (talk) 16:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: If there is a problem with the file names, don't propose deletion, but work together to move the files to fitting filenames and into a separate category if appropriate. --Rosenzweig τ 18:42, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not a Czech bramboráček at all. Typical czech bramborák/bramboráček is flat round where potatoes are the main ingredients. Raw, not fried yet, bramboráček is so sparse, it can't hold its shape. Google images of "bramboráčky" from ".cz" (i.e. excluding this ones) Kmarty (talk) 12:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The closest one with what is showed on pictures "Bramboráček ([1-7]).JPG" could be "bramborové šišky"("potato cones"), Mohnnudel or Gnocchi. But all of them are usually boiled, not fried. Kmarty (talk) 12:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all of you, firstly I do not really understand why the image is proposed to be deleted. Even if the name of the picture would be consider as a misleading (which is not as I will show later), it is appropriate just rename it, not to delete it.
About the name. In Czech is a quite common that several different thinks has the same name and it depends on the context. This type of bread is really called "bramboráček" because the dough from which it is made contains potatoes. However, this does not mean that it is the same thing as the "bramborák" which is mentioned above. The procedure of the preparation is different, but both thinks share the same name. Therefore the problem is that the category mix up together also the different type and that is wrongly linked to Wikipedia projects. Regards --Chmee2 (talk) 13:14, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have nothing about renaming. But, as a Czech, this is the first and only appearance of potato bread called "bramboráček" (I believe this is only some strictly local thing). On every place of Czechia if you say "bramboráček/bramboráčky"(singular/plural), everybody thinks about small form of "bramborák/bramboráky" which is definitely not this one. Placing this picture as a "typical czech bramboráček/bramboráčky" is really misleading. Kmarty (talk) 13:39, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Tento projekt nesplňuje požadavky pro smazání !!!!!!!!
Nápověda
Category:Smažené bramborové krokety sypané směsí
Dobré obrázky
Pokročilé...
Z projektu Wikimedia Commons
Skočit na navigaciSkočit na vyhledávání
Smažené bramborové krokety sypané směsí. Místní specialita prodávaná na trhu nebo v rychlém občerstvení. Prodejní název je :Bramboráček. Oficiání podniková norma pro neznámou pekárnu. Česká stání norma má název Bramborák. Zdrobnělina pro státní :normu je nepřípustná. Jedná se tak vždy o podnikovou normu nebo místní název pro tento výrobek. Tento výrobek nemusí :splňovat ČSN pro Bramborák. Ani podle názvu nebo složení. Czech Republic.
Název je oficiální. S pozdravem Pohled 111.Pohled 111--Pohled 111 (talk) 16:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

--Pohled 111 (talk) 16:21, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: If there is a problem with the file names, don't propose deletion, but work together to move the files to fitting filenames and into a separate category if appropriate. --Rosenzweig τ 18:42, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not a Czech bramboráček at all. Typical czech bramborák/bramboráček is flat round where potatoes are the main ingredients. Raw, not fried yet, bramboráček is so sparse, it can't hold its shape. Google images of "bramboráčky" from ".cz" (i.e. excluding this ones) Kmarty (talk) 12:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The closest one with what is showed on pictures "Bramboráček ([1-7]).JPG" could be "bramborové šišky"("potato cones"), Mohnnudel or Gnocchi. But all of them are usually boiled, not fried. Kmarty (talk) 12:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all of you, firstly I do not really understand why the image is proposed to be deleted. Even if the name of the picture would be consider as a misleading (which is not as I will show later), it is appropriate just rename it, not to delete it.
About the name. In Czech is a quite common that several different thinks has the same name and it depends on the context. This type of bread is really called "bramboráček" because the dough from which it is made contains potatoes. However, this does not mean that it is the same thing as the "bramborák" which is mentioned above. The procedure of the preparation is different, but both thinks share the same name. Therefore the problem is that the category mix up together also the different type and that is wrongly linked to Wikipedia projects. Regards --Chmee2 (talk) 13:14, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have nothing about renaming. But, as a Czech, this is the first and only appearance of potato bread called "bramboráček" (I believe this is only some strictly local thing). On every place of Czechia if you say "bramboráček/bramboráčky"(singular/plural), everybody thinks about small form of "bramborák/bramboráky" which is definitely not this one. Placing this picture as a "typical czech bramboráček/bramboráčky" is really misleading. Kmarty (talk) 13:39, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dobrý den
Není nutné mazat tyto fotografie!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Stači je znovu popsat. Název není bramboráček. Jde o bramborové krokety :pečené. Kdosi je upravil na místní specialitu. Opekájí se na panvičce. Ale dají se smažit i ve fritéze.
Na závěr jsou obaleny v hrubé soli a několika druhů semínek. Podobná norma 21009 v knize "Receptůry teplých pokrmů".
Kam je uložit : Nápověda
Category:Smažené bramborové krokety sypané směsí - Jako místní specialita. Specialita prodávaná na trhu nebo v rychlém :občerstvení.
Název fotografií nemohu přepracovat. User:Chmee2 přepracuj prosím název podobný tomuto. Prosím nemažte a zachraňte místní :specialitu. Děkuji Vám za pomoc. S pozdravem pohled 111.Pohled 111--Pohled 111 (talk) 20:18, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: If there is a problem with the file names, don't propose deletion, but work together to move the files to fitting filenames and into a separate category if appropriate. --Rosenzweig τ 18:42, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not a Czech bramboráček at all. Typical czech bramborák/bramboráček is flat round where potatoes are the main ingredients. Raw, not fried yet, bramboráček is so sparse, it can't hold its shape. Google images of "bramboráčky" from ".cz" (i.e. excluding this ones) Kmarty (talk) 12:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The closest one with what is showed on pictures "Bramboráček ([1-7]).JPG" could be "bramborové šišky"("potato cones"), Mohnnudel or Gnocchi. But all of them are usually boiled, not fried. Kmarty (talk) 12:34, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all of you, firstly I do not really understand why the image is proposed to be deleted. Even if the name of the picture would be consider as a misleading (which is not as I will show later), it is appropriate just rename it, not to delete it.
About the name. In Czech is a quite common that several different thinks has the same name and it depends on the context. This type of bread is really called "bramboráček" because the dough from which it is made contains potatoes. However, this does not mean that it is the same thing as the "bramborák" which is mentioned above. The procedure of the preparation is different, but both thinks share the same name. Therefore the problem is that the category mix up together also the different type and that is wrongly linked to Wikipedia projects. Regards --Chmee2 (talk) 13:13, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have nothing about renaming. But, as a Czech, this is the first and only appearance of potato bread called "bramboráček" (I believe this is only some strictly local thing). On every place of Czechia if you say "bramboráček/bramboráčky"(singular/plural), everybody thinks about small form of "bramborák/bramboráky" which is definitely not this one. Placing this picture as a "typical czech bramboráček/bramboráčky" is really misleading. Kmarty (talk) 13:39, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Tento projekt nesplňuje požadavky pro smazání !!!!!!!!
Nápověda
Category:Smažené bramborové krokety sypané směsí
Dobré obrázky
Pokročilé...
Z projektu Wikimedia Commons
Skočit na navigaciSkočit na vyhledávání
Smažené bramborové krokety sypané směsí. Místní specialita prodávaná na trhu nebo v rychlém občerstvení. Prodejní název je :Bramboráček. Oficiání podniková norma pro neznámou pekárnu. Česká stání norma má název Bramborák. Zdrobnělina pro státní :normu je nepřípustná. Jedná se tak vždy o podnikovou normu nebo místní název pro tento výrobek. Tento výrobek nemusí :splňovat ČSN pro Bramborák. Ani podle názvu nebo složení. Czech Republic.
Název je oficiální. S pozdravem Pohled 111.Pohled 111--Pohled 111 (talk) 16:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

--Pohled 111 (talk) 16:22, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: If there is a problem with the file names, don't propose deletion, but work together to move the files to fitting filenames and into a separate category if appropriate. --Rosenzweig τ 18:42, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Сомнения в авторстве и лицензии: автором указан Петровский семейный архив, а не фотограф, нет разрешения автора или наследники на свободные лицензии. необходимо подтверждение в OTRS. Dogad75 (talk) 21:19, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 13:53, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Logo was downloaded from Twitter but without written permission for licensing by the authoring organization, Take Mirrenberg (talk) 11:29, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: with PD-textlogo. --Jcb (talk) 17:18, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

This meets the treshold to be copyrighted by Belgium law (with the added text) https://finniancolumba.be/en/copyright-2/frequent-questions-belgian-copyright/ Father of Lies (talk) 08:02, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: dont agree. --JuTa 17:58, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Historical photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:33, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A collage of a circa 1914 photograph of Harold Harmsworth from a British governmental publication & a circa 1909 photograph of Alfred Harmsworth taken for an American magazine(The World's Work) by Gertrude Käsebier (1852-1934). Would appear to be public domain in both the UK & the US. Looks to also be public domain in uploader's country(Italy) Abzeronow (talk) 16:32, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: fixed the license(s). --JuTa 17:46, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

http://www.bacciguitars.com/portfolio-posts/riccardo-onori/. Besides photographer can't be the subject. Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:08, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Il file è di proprietà del soggetto raffigurato che lo ha caricato sul suo Flickr con precise indicazioni sul copyright. In precedenza la foto era stata postata su un altro sito, ma ciò non significa che il copyright appartenga a quel sito. Quindi la foto va tenuta. --Nuvolele (talk) 17:00, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Possiamo togliere la richiesta di cancellazione? --Nuvolele (talk) 12:10, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@-Nuvolele: Il file non è più presente su Flickr. Inoltre chi ci dice che Riccardo Onori sia realmente il detentore del copyright (in teoria, non dovrebbe appartenergli), senza contare che la licenza usata su Flickr non è valida (CC by-nc-sa).  Delete per me. --Ruthven (msg) 16:17, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: flickr uploader likely not the author. --JuTa 17:53, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Сомнения в авторстве и лицензии: фото 1958 года, малого размера файла, автор, скорее всего, неизвестно, оцифровано в наше время. Необходимо повреждение в OTRS от автора. Dogad75 (talk) 20:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I earnestly ask not to delete this photo. This is an only photo of my father; it was made by unknown photo atelier in Leningrad (former USSR) in 1968. I have an original at my home and I was the person who made the digitization. The article "Осмоловский Григорий Евсеевич" in Wikipedia is an only use of this photo and the photo is necessary for this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Okolecitza (talk • contribs) 05:14, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyright violation. --JuTa 17:54, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]