Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2019/02/16
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
Redundant photo uploaded 2006, should be deleted and redirected to File:Valley of the shadow of death.jpg as duplicate. BevinKacon (talk) 10:38, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- This is specifically NOT a duplicate. It is a version without cannonballs on the road. Hohum (talk) 12:16, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept as Hohum uploaded a high res replacement.--BevinKacon (talk) 12:24, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Not own work Baconbits (talk) 12:34, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing. --1989 (talk) 15:11, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Not own work. Please upload using a different license. Baconbits (talk) 12:35, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing. --1989 (talk) 15:10, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
(c) REUTERS/Alessandro Bianchi Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing. --1989 (talk) 15:13, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
This image has not been given free copyright Dallasansel (talk) 22:06, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Dallasansel: Why did you remove the speedy nomination of a file that you uploaded to only nominate it for deletion for the same reason that I used? Nihlus 22:09, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Nihlus: You are correct. Dallasansel (talk) 22:38, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: speedily deleted as copyright violation - confirmed by uploader. --Nick (talk) 22:50, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
May be violation of copyright. Prajwal Mudiyappa (talk) 05:57, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted by Ronhjones at 14:00, 16 Februar 2019 UTC: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Vishwa.jpg: May be violation of copyright. --Krdbot 01:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Test file via maps.wikilovesmonuments.org, sorry Braveheart (talk) 16:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted by DerHexer at 17:01, 16 Februar 2019 UTC: Accidental creation (G1) --Krdbot 02:01, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Wikipediaをやめることにしたため Monadaisuki (talk) 14:53, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Keep Not in reason. It is thought that the person who requests this deletion request does not understand the licensing and deletion policy on Wikimedia Commons.--G I Chandor2 (talk) 09:00, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Redundant : This picture is not used from any pages. Monadaisuki (talk) 05:54, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:45, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
"Copyright violation" Sorry, I got this picture from other site. This picture is not mine. Monadaisuki (talk) 04:24, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no new infos, no reason for deletion. see above. Please see COM:LRV. --Wdwd (talk) 11:58, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not the copyright holder of this picture. I stole this picture from other site. COM:LRV is no valid reason to keep it. Monadaisuki (talk) 16:47, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Comment Uploader is trying to get several uploads deleted stating this reason, but most of them, including this one, have consistent camera Exif data (taken with a Sony DSC-HX5V), with few exceptions, such as some newer ones taken with a DSC-HX60V. As they were trying to get their pictures deleted with a different reason in the past (Google translates をやめることにしたため as "Because I decided to quit"), this rather looks like an attempt to find a reason that we would accept. In this specific case, it is also indicative of own work that the file was originally uploaded with a camera-generated file name (XDSC02418.JPG). Well, if they're so desperate to have their pictures deleted, I think we could consider a courtesy deletion, but some are in use. Gestumblindi (talk) 20:15, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
- I had lied because I have a guilty conscience about uploading stolen pictures. However, it is true that I stole the pictures. It is not uncommon for Japanese people to upload pictures with camera-generated file names into theirown sites. If you don't delete the pictures that I uploaded, you will help my wrongdoing. Please consider deleting the pictures.--Monadaisuki (talk) 02:28, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. All their uploads were originally tagged as をやめることにしたため (Google Translate: "Because I decided to quit"). So this user simply wants to remove all their images from Commons. Because courtesy deletion is no longer possible, (s)he now merely changes tactics to get the image deleted and claims copyvio, which is likely not the case (most of their uploads are taken with same camera in the same general area). This particular image is in scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:51, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:51, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipediaをやめることにしたため Monadaisuki (talk) 14:53, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Not in reason. It is thought that the person who requests this deletion request does not understand the licensing and deletion policy on Wikimedia Commons.--G I Chandor2 (talk) 09:00, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Redundant : This picture is not used from any pages. Monadaisuki (talk) 05:54, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: This file is in use on ja:Portal:日本の都道府県/大阪府/新着画像ギャラリー/新着画像保管庫2012年3月分, so it's not redundant. --bjh21 (talk) 12:54, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:45, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
"Copyright violation" Sorry, I got this picture from other site. This picture is not mine. Monadaisuki (talk) 04:23, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no new infos, no reason for deletion. see above. Please see COM:LRV. --Wdwd (talk) 11:57, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not the copyright holder of this picture. I stole this picture from other site. COM:LRV is no valid reason to keep it. Monadaisuki (talk) 16:47, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. All their uploads were originally tagged as をやめることにしたため (Google Translate: "Because I decided to quit"). So this user simply wants to remove all their images from Commons. Because courtesy deletion is no longer possible, (s)he now merely changes tactics to get the image deleted and claims copyvio, which is likely not the case (most of their uploads are taken with same camera in the same general area). This particular image is in scope and in use. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:49, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:51, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipediaをやめることにしたため Monadaisuki (talk) 14:53, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Not in reason. It is thought that the person who requests this deletion request does not understand the licensing and deletion policy on Wikimedia Commons.--G I Chandor2 (talk) 09:00, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Redundant : This picture is not used from any pages. Monadaisuki (talk) 05:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: This file is in use on arz:محافظه اوساكا, en:Osaka Prefecture, and tl:Prepektura ng Osaka. Under COM:INUSE that means it's not redundant. Leaving Wikipedia doesn't mean you get to take your pictures away with you. --bjh21 (talk) 12:50, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- CommentSorry, I didn't realize it. But I don't recommend this picture. Now there are more skyscrapers in Takatsuki city. This picture is old.--Monadaisuki (talk) 05:38, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
"Copyright violation" Sorry, I got this picture from other site. This picture is not mine. Monadaisuki (talk) 04:22, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no new infos, no reason for deletion. see above. Please see COM:LRV. --Wdwd (talk) 11:57, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not the copyright holder of this picture. I stole this picture from other site. COM:LRV is no valid reason to keep it. Monadaisuki (talk) 16:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. All their uploads were originally tagged as をやめることにしたため (Google Translate: "Because I decided to quit"). So this user simply wants to remove all their images from Commons. Because courtesy deletion is no longer possible, (s)he now merely changes tactics to get the image deleted and claims copyvio, which is likely not the case (most of their uploads are taken with same camera in the same general area). This particular image is in scope and in use. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:49, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:51, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipediaをやめることにしたため Monadaisuki (talk) 14:53, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Not in reason. It is thought that the person who requests this deletion request does not understand the licensing and deletion policy on Wikimedia Commons.--G I Chandor2 (talk) 08:59, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Redundant : This picture is not used from any pages. Monadaisuki (talk) 05:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
"Copyright violation" Sorry, I got this picture from other site. This picture is not mine. Monadaisuki (talk) 04:22, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no new infos, no reason for deletion. see above. Please see COM:LRV. --Wdwd (talk) 11:56, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not the copyright holder of this picture. I stole this picture from other site. COM:LRV is no valid reason to keep it. Monadaisuki (talk) 16:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. All their uploads were originally tagged as をやめることにしたため (Google Translate: "Because I decided to quit"). So this user simply wants to remove all their images from Commons. Because courtesy deletion is no longer possible, (s)he now merely changes tactics to get the image deleted and claims copyvio, which is likely not the case (most of their uploads are taken with same camera in the same general area). This particular image is in scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:48, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:51, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipediaをやめることにしたため Monadaisuki (talk) 14:52, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Not in reason. It is thought that the person who requests this deletion request does not understand the licensing and deletion policy on Wikimedia Commons.--G I Chandor2 (talk) 08:59, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Redundant : This picture is not used from any pages. Monadaisuki (talk) 05:56, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
"Copyright violation" Sorry, I got this picture from other site. This picture is not mine. Monadaisuki (talk) 04:21, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no new infos, no reason for deletion. see above. Please see COM:LRV. --Wdwd (talk) 11:56, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not the copyright holder of this picture. I stole this picture from other site. COM:LRV is no valid reason to keep it. Monadaisuki (talk) 16:45, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. All their uploads were originally tagged as をやめることにしたため (Google Translate: "Because I decided to quit"). So this user simply wants to remove all their images from Commons. Because courtesy deletion is no longer possible, (s)he now merely changes tactics to get the image deleted and claims copyvio, which is likely not the case (most of their uploads are taken with same camera in the same general area). This particular image is in scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:47, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:51, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipediaをやめることにしたため Monadaisuki (talk) 14:52, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Not in reason. It is thought that the person who requests this deletion request does not understand the licensing and deletion policy on Wikimedia Commons.--G I Chandor2 (talk) 08:59, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Redundant : This picture is not used from any pages. Monadaisuki (talk) 05:57, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
"Copyright violation" Sorry, I got this picture from other site. This picture is not mine. Monadaisuki (talk) 04:27, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no new infos, no reason for deletion. see above. Please see COM:LRV. --Wdwd (talk) 11:58, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not the copyright holder of this picture. I stole this picture from other site. COM:LRV is no valid reason to keep it. Monadaisuki (talk) 16:45, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. All their uploads were originally tagged as をやめることにしたため (Google Translate: "Because I decided to quit"). So this user simply wants to remove all their images from Commons. Because courtesy deletion is no longer possible, (s)he now merely changes tactics to get the image deleted and claims copyvio, which is likely not the case (most of their uploads are taken with same camera in the same general area). This particular image is in scope for which there is no alternative. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:45, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:52, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipediaをやめることにしたため Monadaisuki (talk) 14:52, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Not in reason. It is thought that the person who requests this deletion request does not understand the licensing and deletion policy on Wikimedia Commons.--G I Chandor2 (talk) 08:59, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Redundant : This picture is not used from any pages. Monadaisuki (talk) 05:58, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
"Copyright violation" Sorry, I got this picture from other site. This picture is not mine. Monadaisuki (talk) 04:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no new infos, no reason for deletion. see above. Please see COM:LRV. --Wdwd (talk) 11:56, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not the copyright holder of this picture. I stole this picture from other site. COM:LRV is no valid reason to keep it. Monadaisuki (talk) 16:45, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: I don't believe the copyvio claim (based on the original reason and the related DR's) but I did a courtesy deletion because there is a close alternative (File:Akutagawa-shotengai.jpg). --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:54, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Wikipediaをやめることにしたため Monadaisuki (talk) 14:51, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Not in reason. It is thought that the person who requests this deletion request does not understand the licensing and deletion policy on Wikimedia Commons.--G I Chandor2 (talk) 08:58, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Redundant : This picture is not used from any pages. Monadaisuki (talk) 05:58, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
"Copyright violation" Sorry, I got this picture from other site. This picture is not mine. Monadaisuki (talk) 04:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no new infos, no reason for deletion. see above. Please see COM:LRV. --Wdwd (talk) 11:55, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not the copyright holder of this picture. I stole this picture from other site. COM:LRV is no valid reason to keep it. Monadaisuki (talk) 16:44, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. All their uploads were originally tagged as をやめることにしたため (Google Translate: "Because I decided to quit"). So this user simply wants to remove all their images from Commons. Because courtesy deletion is no longer possible, (s)he now merely changes tactics to get the image deleted and claims copyvio, which is likely not the case (most of their uploads are taken with same camera in the same general area). This particular image is in scope for which there is no alternative. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:42, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:52, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipediaをやめることにしたため Monadaisuki (talk) 14:51, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Not in reason. It is thought that the person who requests this deletion request does not understand the licensing and deletion policy on Wikimedia Commons.--G I Chandor2 (talk) 08:58, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:43, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Redundant : This picture is not used from any pages. Monadaisuki (talk) 05:58, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
"Copyright violation" Sorry, I got this picture from other site. This picture is not mine. Monadaisuki (talk) 04:19, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no new infos, no reason for deletion. see above. Please see COM:LRV. --Wdwd (talk) 11:55, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not the copyright holder of this picture. I stole this picture from other site. COM:LRV is no valid reason to keep it. Monadaisuki (talk) 16:44, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- Keep All their uploads were originally tagged as をやめることにしたため (Google Translate: "Because I decided to quit"). So this user simply wants to remove all their images from Commons. Because courtesy deletion is no longer possible, (s)he now merely changes tactics to get the image deleted and claims copyvio, which is likely not the case (most of their uploads are taken with same camera in the same general area). This particular image is in scope for which there is no alternative. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:42, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:52, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipediaをやめることにしたため Monadaisuki (talk) 14:51, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Not in reason. It is thought that the person who requests this deletion request does not understand the licensing and deletion policy on Wikimedia Commons.--G I Chandor2 (talk) 08:58, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Redundant : This picture is not used from any pages. Monadaisuki (talk) 05:58, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:43, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
"Copyright violation" Sorry, I got this picture from other site. This picture is not mine. Monadaisuki (talk) 04:19, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:06, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
I'm not the copyright holder of this picture. I stole this picture from other site. COM:LRV is no valid reason to keep it. Monadaisuki (talk) 16:43, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:07, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Wikipediaをやめることにしたため Monadaisuki (talk) 14:51, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Not in reason. It is thought that the person who requests this deletion request does not understand the licensing and deletion policy on Wikimedia Commons.--G I Chandor2 (talk) 08:58, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:43, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Redundant : This picture is not used from any pages. Monadaisuki (talk) 05:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:43, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
"Copyright violation" Sorry, I got this picture (all versions) from other site. This picture is not mine. Monadaisuki (talk) 04:17, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not the copyright holder of this picture. I stole this picture from other site. COM:LRV is no valid reason to keep it. Monadaisuki (talk) 16:43, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- Keep The original deletion reason was をやめることにしたため (Google Translate: "Because I decided to quit"). So this user simply wants to remove all their images from Commons. Because courtesy deletion is no longer possible, (s)he now merely changes tactics to get the image deleted and claims copyvio, which is likely not the case (all their uploads are taken with same camera in the same general area). This particular image is in scope for which there is no alternative. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:33, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 04:52, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipediaをやめることにしたため Monadaisuki (talk) 14:50, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Not in reason. It is thought that the person who requests this deletion request does not understand the licensing and deletion policy on Wikimedia Commons.--G I Chandor2 (talk) 09:01, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Duplicates : This was replaced by "File:RPL objects in the stack (HP 50g).jpg" Monadaisuki (talk) 06:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:42, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
"Copyright violation" Sorry, I got this picture (all versions) from other site. This picture is not mine. Monadaisuki (talk) 04:12, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no new infos, no reason for deletion. see above. Please see COM:LRV. --Wdwd (talk) 11:53, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
I'm not the copyright holder of this picture. I stole this picture from other site. COM:LRV is no valid reason to keep it. Monadaisuki (talk) 16:40, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MB-one (talk) 10:17, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:57, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Yesyesyesyes Sulaiman Bin Ibrahim (talk) 19:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Achim (talk) 16:25, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Delete Decolorized and crop of this image located at [1]. No indication it is the work of the uploader or available under a license compatible with Commons. Hammersoft (talk) 14:06, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing. --1989 (talk) 17:02, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/American Samoa license plate
[edit]Derivative work, copyright violation. See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with Palau license plate, Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with guam license plate.
- File:Motu o Fiafiaga - American Samoa license plate 1985 3004.jpg
- File:American Samoa license plate 2006.jpg
- File:American Samoa license plate 1985 1661.jpg
- File:American Samoa license plate 2000 government.png
- File:American Samoa license plate 1969 1417.png
- File:American Samoa license plate 1977 3540.png
- File:American Samoa license plate 1974 0668.png
- File:American Samoa license plate 1988 6750.png
- File:American Samoa license plate 2011 5504.png
- File:American Samoa license plate 2010 5097 narrow dies.png
- File:American Samoa license plate 2000 9035 centennial wide dies.png
- File:American Samoa license plate 1996 R 518.png
- File:AMERICAN SAMOA 1979 passenger license plate Flickr - woody1778a.jpg
- File:AMERICAN SAMOA 1971 passenger license plate PAGO PAGO MOTU O FIAFIAGA slogan - Flickr - woody1778a.jpg
- File:Samoan license plate.JPG
Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 18:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Anything before 1989 is an easy procedural keep-"This image is in the public domain in the United States because it was first published in the U.S. between 1978 and March 1, 1989, and a substantial number of authorized copies were distributed to the public without a copyright notice, and where the copyright was not later registered."Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 18:23, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: I forgogt that American Samoa is part of the US (really). That means the tree design is public domain unless they followed formalities, which they certainly didn't. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:32, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Zhanggu68 as Speedy (Löschen) and the most recent rationale was: Bei Bildern von Personen müssen wir sehr vorsichtig sein. Es gelten ja strenge Regeln für das Recht am eigenen Bild. Siehe dazu die Hinweise zu Bildrechten Wikipedia:Bildrechte. Ist der Abgebildete ausdrücklich um Einverständnis gefragt worden? Ich frage, da das Bilder eher wie ein Schnappschuss wirkt. Ohne ausdrückliche Einverständnis sollten wir das Bild nicht verwenden. Zhanggu68 (talk) 08:31, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Converted by me to DR, as the nominator's rationale seems to be a bit over-cautious, but might be discussed, of course. -- Túrelio (talk) 08:42, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- I just wanted to clarify that the permission to use the picture was granted. I did not manage to reach the uploader directly. I am new to Wikipedia. If there is a better way, please let me know. --Zhanggu68 (talk) 09:09, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Zhanggu68, just to get this right. You, who are not the uploader, state that "the permission to use the picture was granted"? Or did you mean "not granted"? --Túrelio (talk) 09:17, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Túrelio, yes. It looks just like a snap shot. To me it looked as if the person on the picture did not grand permission to have a foto taken. So I wanted to make sure, that the uploader got the permission before uploading the picture. --Zhanggu68 (talk) 09:47, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- It was a public event and it was allowed to take photos. --Edeler von Janzweitdraußen (talk) 10:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Edeler von Janzweitdraußen Thank you for your reply. A public event does not mean that you are allowed to take and publish photographs of identifiable people. That is especially the case under German rules and regulations. The picture you published is not an event picture, but a portrait picture. You need the explicit consent of the identifiable person. If you did not specifically ask, better take the photograph out. Please see the Board of Trustees resolution on images of identifiable people [2] --Zhanggu68 (talk) 11:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Just delete ist. --Edeler von Janzweitdraußen (talk) 04:17, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Edeler von Janzweitdraußen Thank you for your reply. A public event does not mean that you are allowed to take and publish photographs of identifiable people. That is especially the case under German rules and regulations. The picture you published is not an event picture, but a portrait picture. You need the explicit consent of the identifiable person. If you did not specifically ask, better take the photograph out. Please see the Board of Trustees resolution on images of identifiable people [2] --Zhanggu68 (talk) 11:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Zhanggu68, just to get this right. You, who are not the uploader, state that "the permission to use the picture was granted"? Or did you mean "not granted"? --Túrelio (talk) 09:17, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader agrees to delete (nominated the image for speedy deletion). Taivo (talk) 11:39, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
According to the file description page this is a copyright violation My Name is Madness (talk) 13:51, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
The Flickr link is to my own page and the photograph is my own property, the image is my own so not stolen property. Moylesy98 (talk) 20:38, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Moylesy98: A number of images have been deleted as the flickr license has been set to (C) all right reserved which is not compatible with commons. You will either have to change the license on flickr or upload them yourself. Gbawden (talk) 07:52, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Failed flickr license review. --Gbawden (talk) 07:52, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of scope Fixertool (talk) 13:13, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted by Magog the Ogre at 17:35, 20 Februar 2019 UTC: Vandalism --Krdbot 19:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of scope Fixertool (talk) 13:14, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted by Magog the Ogre at 17:35, 20 Februar 2019 UTC: Vandalism --Krdbot 19:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from song. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:20, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:38, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
No evidence that this work has been published one day or more than 50 years ago. Patrick Rogel (talk) 18:00, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Jeff G., @E4024, @Gbawden, The photo falls in the category in the public domain as the person retired from the air force in 1968. The photo was taken before 1969. Shamsun N Tushar (talk) 03:16, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
I had downloaded this photo from twitter.com without any permission from the author, this photo must be deleted. Shamsun N Tushar (talk) 14:35, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, uploader. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:18, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --1989 (talk) 01:51, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Slightly less centered equivalent to File:Sigma-Aldrich (-)Nicotine analytical standard (2).jpg with no obvious better/different details DMacks (talk) 23:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Equivalent picture to File:Sigma-Aldrich (-)Nicotine analytical standard (2).jpg, no advantage visible. I support the deletion! Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 10:02, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. Ed (Edgar181) 21:22, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 09:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: This file is in use on nn:Søle and sv:Lista över de populäraste hundraserna. Under COM:INUSE that means that it should be treated as being useful for an educational purpose. --bjh21 (talk) 13:15, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Captain-tucker (talk) 12:55, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 09:47, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 12:55, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 09:48, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 12:56, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 09:48, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 12:56, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Despite my notifying him on his user talk page, the uploader has seemingly not undertaken any steps to verify his identity. The image has been published here crediting Patrick Buettgen, but there is no free licence. De728631 (talk) 17:20, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- I don't understand the problem. This picture is used with crediting Patrick Buettgen, the given author on Commons is Patrick Buettgen, the user name of the uploader is Patrick Buettgen. Where is the problem? Some of my pics on Commons are also widely used without a free license. That's absolutely normal. --Stepro (talk) 00:50, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
It is simple. I have made this photo during a business trip for the german broadcaster phoenix. I work for phoenix - you can see that e.g. on several credits on the phoenix website. Because i am the author (!) of this photo AND i got the permission of my boss, PLUS Horst Seehofer is a celebrity and it was no private space where i shot this photo - i am free to publish it, where i want it to be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patrick Buettgen (talk • contribs) 15:05, 21 February 2019 (UTC) --Patrick Buettgen (talk) 15:06, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- The problem is not your right to publish the image, but per our rules and guidelines you are required to verify your Wikimedia user account. This image has been used elsewhere without a free licence, and unfortunately anyone can created a Commons user account with your name. Every day we get a lot of pretenders and fraudulent accounts at Commons who claim to be the original author of a work that can be found online. So, this is in fact a measure to protect your copyright. Which is also what I wrote on your user talk page. De728631 (talk) 18:40, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- Nein, Du schriebst auf seiner Diskussionsseite, dass "wir" eine Freigabe mit einer "@phoenix.de"-Adresse benötigen würden. Diese Forderung ist evtl. gar nicht erfüllbar und auch nicht notwendig.
- Um mich selbst wieder als Beispiel anzuführen: Ich habe mehrfach Fotos auf Commons hochgeladen, die vorher mit unfreier Lizenz auf sportschau.de benutzt wurden. Du müsstest analog jetzt von mir Freigaben mit einer @sportschau.de-Adresse verlangen. Diese könnte ich selbstverständlich nicht bieten.
- Das von Dir geforderte Verfahren kann hier also von vornherein nicht funktionieren. Und es ist auch nicht notwendig: Es ist völlig legitim und normal, seine Fotos außerhalb von Commons auch anderweitig und mit anderer Lizenz zu verwenden. Solange der Autor seine Fotos selbst hochlädt, gehen wir im Allgemeinen davon aus, dass er auch der Autor ist. Sonst müsstest Du sämtliche Benutzer mit Realnamen zu einer Verifizierung auffordern, und dazu ist diese nicht da, und das ist vom Supportteam auch nicht leistbar.
- Nur wenn berechtigte Zweifel an der Urheberschaft oder der Identität des Uploaders bestehen, muss eingegriffen werden. Diese Zweifel sehe ich hier nicht. --Stepro (talk) 19:02, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- Natürlich ist es legitim, seine Fotos außerhalb von Commons mit anderen Lizenzen zu verwenden. Berechtigte Zweifel treten bei mir aber immer dann auf, wenn ein Bild so wie hier woanders unfrei mit Realnamen verwendet wird. Dann ist es nämlich ein leichtes, sich auf Commons als der Fotograf auszugeben, und das Bild hier hinterher zu veröffentlichen. Die übliche Vorgehensweise zur Bestätigung ist daher eben, dass man sich die Identität des Nutzers bestätigen lässt. In diesem Fall wäre die Phoenix-Adresse eben am überzeugendsten, weil es auch in der Quellenangabe bei Commons so genannt wird. Patrick Büttgen hat hier ja selbst das Einverständnis seines Chefs erwähnt, also gehe ich davon aus, dass er für Phoenix arbeitet. De728631 (talk) 19:43, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- The problem is not your right to publish the image, but per our rules and guidelines you are required to verify your Wikimedia user account. This image has been used elsewhere without a free licence, and unfortunately anyone can created a Commons user account with your name. Every day we get a lot of pretenders and fraudulent accounts at Commons who claim to be the original author of a work that can be found online. So, this is in fact a measure to protect your copyright. Which is also what I wrote on your user talk page. De728631 (talk) 18:40, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep There is nothing OTRS could prove beyond the evidence already presented here. --Krd 06:36, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
I have just accepted permission for “File:Horst_Seehofer.jpg” under ticket:2019022210004559. --Stepro (talk) 13:37, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: OTRS ticket has been sent and accepted. --De728631 (talk) 14:02, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
z důvodu změny Suvastan (talk) 22:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 18:16, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
"Superman" is a copyrighted character, making this image out of scope. To quote the instructions given in the Upload Wizard,
"We can't accept work created or inspired by others. By default, you can't upload someone else's work. This includes...drawings of characters from comics, TV or movies, even if you drew them yourself."
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:39, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Copyright violation. See COM:TOYS:
In the United States, copyright is granted for toys even if the toy is ineligible for copyright in the source country.
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:39, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Copyright violation. See COM:TOYS:
In the United States, copyright is granted for toys even if the toy is ineligible for copyright in the source country.
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:40, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Graphic with low EV. Images of ship crest and ship are already on Commons. Kges1901 (talk) 00:20, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. This type of image neither fits into Category:Recruitment nor is there a visible intent of advertising which might make it worth to keep the file. De728631 (talk) 16:36, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:40, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
I change my mind I don't want it to be on internet. Kamilrun (talk) 00:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:41, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation. I managed to trace the image to a now-defunct site: https://web.archive.org/web/20090105235622/http://www.pcs.edu.pk/Chairman_message.aspx
However, nothing on the site suggests the image is under a free license. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:49, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:41, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Superseded by File:Texas FM 1.svg and similarly named files. The SVG versions were completely redrawn from the specifications. Also see Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Texas Farm to Market shields 1-500, Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Texas Farm to Market shields 1001-1500, Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Texas Farm to Market shields 1501-2000, Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Texas Farm to Market shields 2001-2500, Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Texas Farm to Market shields 2501-3000, Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Texas Farm to Market shields 3001-3500, Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Texas Farm to Market shields 3501-4000, Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Texas Farm to Market shields 4001-4500, Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Texas Farm to Market shields 4501-5000 and COM:HWY/P for similar deletions.
Rschen7754 02:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:42, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
broken file Splattereel (talk) 02:11, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:43, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Bappa Hossan Bappa Hossan (talk) 02:12, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:43, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Walk Like an Egyptian as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: doesn't look like own work; if it's not own work, then the file is not indicated properly
- File:Henry Pratt Logo PNG.png
- File:Henry Pratt Hog Ships Propellers.jpg
- File:Henry Pratt Butterfly Valve Patent Approval Page 4.jpg
- File:Henry Pratt Butterfly Valve Patent Approval Page 3.jpg
- File:Henry Pratt Butterfly Valve Patent Approval.jpg
- File:Henry Pratt Butterfly Valve Patent Approval Page 2.jpg
- File:Henry Pratt LaSalle Street Tunnel 3.jpg
- File:Henry Pratt LaSalle Street Tunnel 1.jpg
- File:Henry Pratt LaSalle Street Tunnel 2.jpg
- File:Henry Pratt Butterfly Valves.jpg
- File:Henry Pratt Rectangular Valve.jpg
- File:Henry Pratt Boiler Co..jpg
- File:Henry Pratt.jpg
1989 (talk) 03:13, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:44, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
No idea, what educational value can have a photo of such quality of an unidentified beetle. Sneeuwschaap (talk) 03:22, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:45, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
No idea, what educational value can have a photo of such quality of an unidentified beetle. Sneeuwschaap (talk) 03:23, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:46, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
No idea, what educational value can have a photo of such quality of an unidentified beetle. Sneeuwschaap (talk) 03:23, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:46, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of scope; personal photo of a user who was not here to contribute. Hindust@niक्या करें? बातें! 15:10, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:44, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
low quality, no exif, unlikely own work Krd 15:26, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, pcp. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:48, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:44, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused low resolution photo of domesticated cat. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:36, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:43, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
No description given for image to make it useful for educational purposes. Nv8200p (talk) 15:40, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- After I don't know how many days, I still need to explain the importation process to volunteers.
- I'm just one dude doing all the process: Commons:500px licensing data
- So, how about to help providing a description? No trying to delete/remove the effort of another volunteer?
- -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 22:23, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- If I was sure what it was I would provide a description. People and bots are importing tons of crap from Flickr, Panaramio and 500px that has no description, and/or no geolocation and/or is catagorized so general that you cannot derive exactly what or where it is, so what good is it for educational use? Just my opinion. Quality would be better than quantity. Nv8200p (talk) 00:18, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
-
- The same effort to you delete, you could simply enter at 500px link and see that this photo is a sequence:
- A well educational register of a building.
- The description is not the only way to create a educational material, Photography is a language, that by itself is sufficient to create a valuable educational content, if you don't understand about it, I suggest read and study about photography before the deletions requests.
- Moreover, if you believe that descriptions are mandatory to create a educational media, you could simply write down a description, take less time and energy than create a deletion request.
- "tons of crap" is not a term to be used in a healthy community, especially adjectivizing another volunteer efforts.
- I'm not a simply importer, this is not my main work here, this was an emergency work, that I'm the only one that face the challenge, an exception, and because of that I'm seeing the worst of this community.
- You must remember that this is a Wiki, a collaborative community, contribute in what you believe that is import, deletion a valuable content is not a way to that.
- -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 15:19, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- I believe every picture should stand on its own. 500px.com may not always be there to refer back to. Panaramio is gone. The description on every image you imported on this series is "500px provided description: West I 35 []" What good is that? No other info makes the image worthless not valuable educational content by just existing. Just the way I feel about it. Your seem passionate about what you are doing and I don't care that much about it. I withdraw the nomination.Nv8200p (talk) 02:46, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: No withdrawn. --Gbawden (talk) 06:43, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:41, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:41, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rajeevmehtaa (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
- File:Rajeev Mehta Photographer.png
- File:Rajeev Mehta.jpg
- File:Rajeev Mehta Social Media Expert in India.png
- File:Rajeev Mehta - Social Media Marketing Expert.jpg
- File:Rajeev Mehta Social Media Expert.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:08, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:41, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:08, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:41, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Raju mittal (talk · contribs)
[edit]Small images without EXIF data, please upload the original files, or send a permission via COM:OTRS.
- File:Civil nit nagaland.jpg
- File:ECE.png
- File:Mechanical.png
- File:Electrical nit nagaland.png
- File:Cse lab.png
- File:Eie nit nagaland.png
- File:Techno cultural fest nit nagaland.jpg
- File:Techno-cultural-festival-‘Ekarikthin-2016’-underway.jpg
- File:Sports1 nit nagaland.jpg
- File:Sports nit nagaland.jpg
- File:Hostel nit nagaland.png
- File:Gallery1.png
- File:Gallery2.png
- File:Gallery-nit nagaland.jpg
Yann (talk) 19:59, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 18:14, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Raju mittal (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:09, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:40, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Moviebuff143 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:10, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:40, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:10, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:40, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:11, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:40, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rakesh gunti (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:11, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:38, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rakesh gunti (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal images, out of Commons Scope. Uploader is only uploading private images showing himself.
- File:Rakesh gunti.1.jpg
- File:Rakesh gunti rakesh.jpg
- File:Gunti rakesh.jpg
- File:Rakesh gunti1.jpg
- File:Rakesh gunti.jpg
- File:Rakesh gunti2.jpg
Migebert (talk) 08:13, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rehman 06:29, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:11, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:38, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:12, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:38, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:12, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:38, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ramakingston (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:12, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:38, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:13, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:37, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:13, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:37, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by RCMInternational (talk · contribs)
[edit]Promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:Vweekenderfestival.JPG
- File:Vweekenderfestvial.JPG
- File:Vaweekenderfestival.jpeg
- File:Vanessaamorosiafl.jpg
- File:Vanessaaflbreakfast.jpg
- File:Katelive2009.jpg
- File:Carltour2009.jpg
- File:Pariswellslive.jpg
- File:Carlriseleypic.jpg
- File:RalphCarr06.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:14, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; unlikely to be own work. --Gbawden (talk) 06:37, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:15, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:36, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by RAMESH1502 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
- File:Rameshambika5.jpg
- File:Rameshambika3.jpg
- File:Rameshambika4.jpg
- File:Rameshambika.jpg
- File:Rameshambika1.jpg
- File:Rameshambika2.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:15, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:36, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:16, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:35, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ramentanti373 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:16, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:35, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:16, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:34, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:16, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:34, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:18, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:34, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:18, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:34, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:19, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:33, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:19, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:34, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:19, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:32, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Not the uploader's own work. A cropped copy can be seen here which in turn states the original came from the subject's Facebook account. My Name is Madness (talk) 17:34, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:33, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Copyviol from https://bombacarta.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/brunorombi-223x300.jpg Frullatore Tostapane (talk) 18:15, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:29, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
copyviol from here http://www.radicalifvg.it/damiani.html Frullatore Tostapane (talk) 18:23, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:29, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Global lock evasion by sock of LTA Nafeby633/Sry88
- File:Khunying Sudarat Rice Planting at MahaSarakarm Province, Thailand in June 2017 for Rice Planting.jpg
- File:Khunying Sudarat with Thai Farmers at MahaSarakarm Province, Thailand in June 2017 for Rice Planting.jpg
- File:Khunying Sudarat Keyurapan and her husband at the Royal Thai Palace in 2017.jpg
- File:Pune PPG.jpg
— Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 19:12, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --Paul_012 (talk) 18:10, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete: All images is small. --Thyj (talk) 04:36, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:28, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Elphas Mashamba2 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Portrait photos from non notable persons are out of project scope!
Ras67 (talk) 21:17, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:27, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of project scope! Ras67 (talk) 21:23, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:27, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Photo from the facebook site of Bishop Haľko https://www.facebook.com/jozef.halko.biskup/photos/a.205311879801234/305817933083961/?type=1&theater LacoR (talk) 22:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:26, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Photo: Claude Donne, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 23:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:25, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
File:Reverse psychology in action- Just because there is a NO ENTRY marker, that's why people want to see what's there 30-08-2009 13-19-59.JPG
[edit]less useful Gopal1035 (talk) 09:22, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: This file is in use on en:Baba Banda Singh Bahadur Inter State Bus Terminus. Under COM:INUSE that means it should be treated as being useful for an educational purpose. --bjh21 (talk) 13:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- This user seems to have returned to Commons after a long absence only to blank out the file descriptions of their works and to nominate them for deletion for no good reason, so please keep this in mind when reviewing this and the other deletion discussions started by this user today. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:18, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 07:00, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
File:Fluffy Littlefoot Dabbu, the backyard dogs playing with Vivek and Gopal 18-04-2009 08-41-19.JPG
[edit]personal photo, less useful Gopal1035 (talk) 09:24, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: INUSE. --Gbawden (talk) 07:00, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Copyviol, there is still the logo of Archivio Andrea Pazienza. Melquíades (msg) 09:24, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:00, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
personal, less education use Gopal1035 (talk) 09:37, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:59, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 09:42, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:59, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 09:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 06:59, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 09:45, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 06:59, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
personal clipart, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 09:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 06:59, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
generic object, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 09:50, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: This file is in use on ru:История почты и почтовых марок Сингапура and ru:Почтовые индексы в Сингапуре. Under COM:INUSE, that means it should be treated as being useful for an educational purpose. --bjh21 (talk) 13:22, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 06:58, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 09:54, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: This file is in use on pt:Transporte ferroviário na Índia. By COM:INUSE that means it should be treated as being useful for an educational purpose. --bjh21 (talk) 18:39, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 06:58, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
File:16 Dec 2007 Child Yawning after playing with dog Vivek Jalandhar Punjab India - gopal1035 075.jpg
[edit]personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 09:54, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 06:58, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
blurry image of low quality Gopal1035 (talk) 10:00, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep This file is in use on en:Nawanshahr, nl:Nawanshahr, no:Nawanshahr, or:ନୱାନଶାହର, and pa:ਸ਼ਹੀਦ ਭਗਤ ਸਿੰਘ ਨਗਰ. By COM:INUSE, that means it should not be deleted on grounds of quality. --bjh21 (talk) 18:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 06:56, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
low quality image Gopal1035 (talk) 10:01, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; the quality is not that poor and it could reasonably be used. --Gbawden (talk) 06:56, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 10:01, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:56, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
low quality image Gopal1035 (talk) 10:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: This file is in use on ja:ナーバー, so by COM:INUSE it's immune from deletion on grounds of quality. --bjh21 (talk) 18:52, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 06:55, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
low quality image Gopal1035 (talk) 10:05, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: This file is in use on tcy:ಗೋಬರ್ ಗ್ಯಾಸ್, which by COM:INUSE means it's immune from deletion on grounds of quality. --bjh21 (talk) 18:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 06:54, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
File:Dress for Group Testing Officer (GTO) Tasks of Service Selection Board (SSB) Interviews.jpg
[edit]personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 10:06, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: This file is in use on en:Services Selection Board. By COM:INUSE that means it should be treated as being useful for an educational purpose. --bjh21 (talk) 18:57, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 06:54, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Photo of lighting in unknown location. Title translates as "nighttime atmosphere at the riverside.", not much help. Out of scope Malcolma (talk) 10:41, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Low quality. --Gbawden (talk) 06:52, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
We have enough penis — regards, Revi 13:57, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
- I would say more than enough: Delete --E4024 (talk) 13:58, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - quite enough. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:45, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
[NSFW] We have enough penis. — regards, Revi 10:49, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Useless, poor quality, redundant and out of scope. AshFriday (talk) 06:34, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:51, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
[NSFW] We have enough penis. — regards, Revi 10:50, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Useless, poor quality, redundant and out of scope. AshFriday (talk) 06:35, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:51, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
poor quality Tukka (talk) 11:25, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:51, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
generic image, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 11:26, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Bad deletion rationale. Files should be deleted only if there are copyright problems. And this file is "educational" enough to be used in 9 Wikipedia and 2 Wikivoyage articles. Keep. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:12, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: We need generic images, too! This file is in use on many Wikipedias, from ca:Jalandhar to xmf:ჯალანდჰარი. By COM:INUSE that means it should be treated as being useful for an educational purpose. --bjh21 (talk) 19:05, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion, file is INUSE. --Gbawden (talk) 06:51, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
(c) Sander Martens, all rights reserved, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:33, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:50, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE personal images.
- File:BIOGRAPHY OF DR. TAIWO EMMANUEL TOYIN 13.jpg
- File:BIOGRAPHY OF DR. TAIWO EMMANUEL TOYIN 12.jpg
- File:BIOGRAPHY OF DR. TAIWO EMMANUEL TOYIN 11.jpg
- File:BIOGRAPHY OF DR. TAIWO EMMANUEL TOYIN 10.jpg
- File:BIOGRAPHY OF DR. TAIWO EMMANUEL TOYIN 09.jpg
- File:BIOGRAPHY OF DR. TAIWO EMMANUEL TOYIN 08.jpg
- File:BIOGRAPHY OF DR. TAIWO EMMANUEL TOYIN 07.jpg
- File:BIOGRAPHY OF DR. TAIWO EMMANUEL TOYIN 06.jpg
- File:BIOGRAPHY OF DR. TAIWO EMMANUEL TOYIN 05.jpg
- File:BIOGRAPHY OF DR. TAIWO EMMANUEL TOYIN 04.jpg
- File:BIOGRAPHY OF DR. TAIWO EMMANUEL TOYIN.jpg
- File:BIOGRAPHY OF DR. TAIWO EMMANUEL TOYIN 01.pdf
- File:BIOGRAPHY OF DR. TAIWO EMMANUEL TOYIN 03.jpg
Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:44, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; likely copyvios as well. --Gbawden (talk) 06:49, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
COM:PENIS: This is pretty low quality, out of focus (badly), and uses a coin for scale. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 12:45, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Useless, poor quality, redundant and out of scope. AshFriday (talk) 06:35, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:48, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
(c) Jessica Forde, www.jessicaforde.com, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:48, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Land%C3%B3_d%C3%A1ndole_la_mano_a_una_chica.jpg Ontzak 
(Bilbo ta Bizkai guztia) 13:54, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Egun on. What about the article to which it is attached? --E4024 (talk) 14:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
What article?--Fixertool (talk) 22:33, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by Magog the Ogre. --Gbawden (talk) 06:46, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
This photo was downloaded from https://cscquetta.gov.pk/Notable_FMs.php, without any permission, it must be deleted. Shamsun N Tushar (talk) 14:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Shamsun N Tushar: You don't think it was published within three years of creation? — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:58, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Jeff G., The uploaded photo has not been granted any permission from the website (from where it was downloaded). Shamsun N Tushar (talk) 15:25, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Shamsun N Tushar: If the portrait was published within three years of 1965 creation in Pakistan, then it is PD per {{PD-Pakistan}} and we don't need permission per COM:ART. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:32, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Jeff G., The uploaded photo has not been granted any permission from the website (from where it was downloaded). Shamsun N Tushar (talk) 15:25, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- He was Commander-in-Chief between 1951 and 1958. The pic must have been published even before. --E4024 (talk) 16:24, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep per E4024. I took "1965" from this edit to be more accurate than the original date of "1940-41". — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:41, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: Per discussion. --Gbawden (talk) 06:45, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
This seems to be a painting, not a photograph, so I don't think {{PD-Pakistan}} applies. Yann (talk) 23:51, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per Yann, it appears paintings get 50 years pma protection in Pakistan. @Shxahxh: Who was the artist and what was their lifetime? — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 05:01, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Delete - Images like these must satisfy {{PD-US-expired}}, which states: "Public domain works must be out of copyright in both the United States and in the source country of the work in order to be hosted on the Commons."--Officer (talk) 06:25, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 06:35, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
personal photo so delete it immediately Nik908 (talk) 15:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:45, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by LindaJulian (talk · contribs)
[edit]These files are all spam: see Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Akbar_de_Wighar_Signature.png
- File:Cropped portrait of Akbar de Wighar Founder Kartenz Animation Studios in 2017.png
- File:Kartenz Animation Studios in 2012.jpg
- File:Kartenz Johny Mechanic Movie Poster.jpg
- File:Major Rebel Logo.png
- File:Kartenz Animation Studios Logo(2015).png
- File:Kartenz Animation Studios Logo.jpg
Mahir256 (talk) 06:05, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:17, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Cutout of magazine article, no attribution, blatantly false copyright claim. Hairy Dude (talk) 06:06, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:18, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
copyright poster. - I am Davidzdh. 06:48, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:21, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
out of scope Cabayi (talk) 07:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:21, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
low quality image Gopal1035 (talk) 10:02, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:23, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
loq quality image Gopal1035 (talk) 10:02, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:23, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Leandrocumpianar (talk · contribs)
[edit]Promotional content for company with no apparent notability. Not realistically useful for educational purposes and therefore outside of Commons' project scope. If deemed within scope for some reason, verified licensing permission is required to confirm the claim that the uploader is the sole author of all the graphics, design, photos and texts.
—LX (talk, contribs) 10:17, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:24, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Screenshot of none free Map GPSLeo (talk) 12:05, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:26, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Files in Category:Viktor Schreckengost
[edit]Viktor Schreckengost died in 2008 and his works are under copyright. See, for example, the copyright notice at https://clevelandart.org/art/2000.65 . Regarding File:LSHauditorium.jpg, no FOP for public sculptures in the USA.
- File:Apocalypse '42.jpg
- File:LSHauditorium.jpg
- File:Viktor schreckengost per cowan pottery studio, bacile da punch 'cocktails e sigarette', 1934, 01.jpg
- File:Viktor schreckengost per cowan pottery studio, bacile da punch 'cocktails e sigarette', 1934, 02.jpg
- File:Viktor schreckengost per cowan pottery studio, bacinella da punch, lakewood (OH), 1931.jpg
- File:Viktor schreckengost per cowan pottery studio, coppa new yorker (jazz), 1930 ca. 01.jpg
- File:Viktor schreckengost per cowan pottery studio, coppa new yorker (jazz), 1930 ca. 02.jpg
- File:Viktor schreckengost per cowan pottery, bacile jazz, rocky river OH 1931.jpg
- File:Viktor schreckengost per cowan pottery, contenitore da punch, rocky river OH 1931, 01.jpg
- File:Viktor schreckengost per cowan pottery, contenitore da punch, rocky river OH 1931, 02.jpg
Rrburke (talk) 12:18, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:31, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of image. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:19, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Green Giant (talk) 19:56, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
No camera EXIF. The uploader has a history of grabbing images off the Web as "Own Work". . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:37, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --1989 (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Low-re images, missing EXIF informations, suspicious Flickr account.
Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:40, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Uploader had removed the DR tags so I wasn't aware User:Patrick Rogel had there was already a bulk nom for them. So I'm converting my (dup) nom into a support of their original nom:
- Delete all License fail: flickr license-washing. One of these uploads is obvious screen-cap, one if I flip it finds the original. The whole flickr stream looks dubious due to range of compositions, lack of EXIF, etc. so COM:PCP on the other uploads from it as well.
- and adding to the original nom one other I found:
- DMacks (talk) 03:48, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Comment See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Damcooldas for likely sock using same stream. DMacks (talk) 03:54, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Comment You may want to expand this to a larger group of socks. The list of socks related to this (and Damcooldas) that was recently found on en.wp has other files uploaded here and I think nearly all of them, and quite probably all of the image, are being flickr washed. The other accounts that appear to have uploaded here are:
- Thanks, Ravensfire (talk) 19:24, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete all Obvious flickr washing for multiple images making all images from this sock group highly suspect. Ravensfire (talk) 19:49, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- I just deleted all of these in my original nom, all of those in the other nom I mentioned, and all of those by the accounts Ravensfire listed. Leaving open a bit in case others feel like chiming in or noting other accounts.... DMacks (talk) 07:03, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks! Ravensfire (talk) 15:42, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:27, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
DW, if not CR violation. E4024 (talk) 14:08, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:28, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
remains of a files move, not needed anymore Aeroid (talk) 14:28, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:29, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:06, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:31, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused test of questionable notability. Also Commons:Screenshots. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:08, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
I am the author of the videos posted. The videos were uploaded accidentally and therefore I would like to have the removed. mmolinari2
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:31, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:18, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:42, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by My Name is Madness as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Obvious copyright violation from here 1989 (talk) 15:21, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:43, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:29, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:44, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
very poor quality snapshot of someone driving by the MGM Grand in Las Vegas. We have MANY other high quality images of the building from a similar angle. Such poor quality it does not benefit the project. Missvain (talk) 16:19, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:46, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Very poor quality. We have many images of the Category:MGM Grand Las Vegas at night and from the same angle that are of good quality. Such poor quality no one will use it. Missvain (talk) 16:34, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:47, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Very low quality image of the Category:Exterior of the MGM Grand Las Vegas. We have any high quality versions at night of the same angle. Missvain (talk) 16:58, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:48, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
There is no freedom of panorama in Canada for text and the photo violates text author's copyright. Taivo (talk) 18:41, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:48, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Images come from http://labopheno.com/ which has a clear copyright notice at the bottom of the page.
- © جميع الحقوق محفوظة لموقع مخبر الفينومينولوجيا وتطبيقاتها
. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:32, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:51, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
There is no freedom of panorama in Latvia and the blue chair is a modern sculpture. The photo violates sculptor's (Villu Jaanisoo) copyright. Taivo (talk) 21:42, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:56, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
unused, no category, no encyclopedic value, just a test, etc F (talk) 13:20, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 14:44, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:05, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 14:44, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:15, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 14:45, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:35, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 14:45, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 10:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: This file is in use on en:Services Selection Board and Services Selection Board (Q7455844). COM:INUSE says that means we should treat it as being useful for an educational purpose. --bjh21 (talk) 19:00, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: per bjh21. --whym (talk) 06:11, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
I uploaded this PDF file with my real name and surname by mistake, but I don’t want to publish this data abou me on the internet. Please, delete this file and oversight it, if cou can, too. MmichaelDr. (talk) 15:47, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Please email oversighters for further suppression. --whym (talk) 06:14, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Does not have any connection what so ever to the subject. It may be a picture from the location, but it doesn't have anything to do with the memorial of victims of terrorism acts. 109.66.225.26 14:16, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- There is no doubt that the picture was taken on that location (see below). If it is unrelated to the subject (are you really sure?), just rename it and change its category, but that's not a reason to delete it. it would first be necessary to determine what it is exactly. Djampa (talk) 07:22, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep it and we will understand what it is. User:Geagea? --E4024 (talk) 18:09, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
-
2014-02-24 09:50:14 -
2014-02-24 09:52:18 -
2014-02-24 09:52:36 -
2014-02-24 09:53:18 -
2014-02-24 09:53:43
Kept: It's a computerized memorial post placed permanently.. no valid reason for deletion. -- Geagea (talk) 00:20, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Low-quality content that does not add value beyond our existing coverage of the same topic Nv8200p (talk) 15:36, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- In scope. No reason for deletion. Keep Insider (talk) 14:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- It is very low resolution and not sharp focus. We have better shots of the same thing. Commons:Project_scope/Summary#Must_be_realistically_useful_for_an_educational_purpose says it is out of scope. Nv8200p (talk) 00:10, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted, considering small size, the photo has too bad composition to be useful. Taivo (talk) 15:22, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
No FOP in Iran. Hanooz 15:22, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:00, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Soumyaranjan Dwibedy (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
- File:Sambalpuri folk dance 06.jpg
- File:Sambalpuri folk dance 03.jpg
- File:Sambalpuri folk dance 01.jpg
- File:Sambalpuri folk dance 02.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:38, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:00, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagrams of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:39, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
I have uploaded the svg file of each of these images in jpg diagram
ETAPAS 
COMPUERTA 
Proceso 5 Etapas
Nicotine_analytical_standard_(3).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3448029174).jpg){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3447215167).jpg){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3448029098).jpg){kind=link}
.jpeg){kind=link}
_they_send.jpg){kind=link}
_Tasks_of_Service_Selection_Board_(SSB)_Interviews.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![174 File:Pedvāle open air museum. "The Sky Chair" by Villu Jaanisioo - panoramio.jpg](#File:Pedvāle_open_air_museum._"The_Sky_Chair"_by_Villu_Jaanisioo_-_panoramio.jpg){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_3.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_1.jpg){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_2.jpg){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_4.jpg){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_5.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Nicotine_analytical_standard_(1).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Nicotine_analytical_standard_(3).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Nicotine_analytical_standard_(3).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Nicotine_analytical_standard_(2).jpg){kind=link}
Nicotine_analytical_standard_(3).jpg){kind=link}
Nicotine_analytical_standard_(3).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3448029174).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3448029174).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3448029174).jpg){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3448029174).jpg){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3447215167).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3447215167).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3447215167).jpg){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3447215167).jpg){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3448029098).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3448029098).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3448029098).jpg){kind=link}
_Coleoptera_(3448029098).jpg){kind=link}
.jpeg){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpeg){kind=link}
.jpeg){kind=link}
_they_send.jpg){kind=link}
_they_send.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_they_send.jpg){kind=link}
_they_send.jpg){kind=link}
_Tasks_of_Service_Selection_Board_(SSB)_Interviews.jpg){kind=link}
_Tasks_of_Service_Selection_Board_(SSB)_Interviews.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_1931.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_1930_ca._01.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_1930_ca._02.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_3.jpg){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_3.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_3.jpg){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_3.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Tks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siramthar (talk • contribs) 17:25, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Added image release for commons at Ticket#2019021910009033 .
--186.30.92.23 20:19, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:58, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:40, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:57, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.
- File:Méthodes pour réduire les pertes de matière.jpg
- File:Procédés de récupération des particules.jpg
- File:Formule.JPG
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:42, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:53, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Low-quality content that does not add value beyond our existing coverage of the same topic. Nv8200p (talk) 15:47, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: not the best nor the bigger - but not so bad. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:55, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%D0%A2%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%86%D1%8F_%D0%BE%D0%BF%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%85_%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%96%D0%B2.png РоманГера (talk) 16:18, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: unused graph of qustionable utility+author request. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:52, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo 99kerob (talk) 17:09, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:52, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:%D0%9A%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%B8%D1%84%D1%96%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%86%D1%96%D1%8F_%D0%BE%D0%BF%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%85_%D0%BB%D1%96%D0%BD%D1%96%D0%B9_%D0%B7%D0%B2%27%D1%8F%D0%B7%D0%BA%D1%83.png&action=submit РоманГера (talk) 17:35, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: unused graph of qustionable utility+author request. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:51, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Same person as an author and an object - can be only as "selfie" which is unlikely with such positioning Tatewaki (talk) 17:38, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:50, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
One-time upload without EXIF. Sorry for suspecting "own work" declaration. E4024 (talk) 18:48, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:47, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, but this is clearly a photo of a video projection, copyright to which is held by the creator of the video projection. GRuban (talk) 20:02, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
This is a photo I took at a live talk given by the subject; while the rightsholder of the projection would have copyright to the projection itself, I hold copyright to this image of the event. Perimeander (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Kind of. The rightsholder of the projection can't reprint your image without your permission; but neither can you without theirs, and similarly you can't give your image away for others to reprint. Otherwise it's like you going to a screening of Iron Man 3 with a video camera, videotaping the screen, and then publishing your print of the movie, which would, presumably, make Marvel rather unhappy. Copyright is full of strange quirks like this. For what it's worth, I looked around and was able to find another picture of Robyn Doolittle, from a YouTube video that is licensed Creative Commons Attribution by the person taking the video, and put that on our article. --GRuban (talk) 21:00, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:43, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Montage of images, each of which needs to have an appropriate licence to be hosted here. The more recent ones are almost certainly still in copyright. Rodhullandemu (talk) 21:50, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:42, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Pic published by the website digidaan.net (which owns the copyright according to exif) since 2014. Probably not free Titlutin (talk) 21:57, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - a permission have to be sent to com:OTRS. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:42, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Painfully low quality, low resolution image of New York-New York Hotel and Casino. We have many more photographs of better quality of the property from this angle. Missvain (talk) 22:27, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: used. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:41, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
EXIF data indicates image was downloaded from Facebook. Files that were originally published outside of Commons require OTRS tickets. Ytoyoda (talk) 22:31, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination + potential DW issue. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:38, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 11:50, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. We have very few illustrations of the interior of Guru Nanak Dev University. Depicting such environments is definitely within our project scope. Gopal1035: Do not blank out content like you did here. Removing file descriptions is disruptive. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:49, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:43, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Redundant low res crop of File:Wilbur Wright 1905.jpg uploaded back in 2004, should be redirected to File:Wilbur Wright.jpg as duplicate. BevinKacon (talk) 12:14, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:38, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Edris Eckhardt died in 1998 and her works are copyrighted. See copyright notice at https://clevelandart.org/art/1941.665 Rrburke (talk) 12:21, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:36, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
In my opinion not own work. Higher resolution images can be found here. It is the only contribution of the user, no metadata and a watermark copyright of somebody else. Wouter (talk) 12:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:34, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
This image appears elsewhere on the Web. There is no camera EXIF so it is unlikely to be "own work" as claimed. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:34, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
this pic which say that File:سامح سامي رئيس تحرير مجلة الفيلم.jpg is my own work — Preceding unsigned comment added by عماد منصور (talk • contribs) 12:35, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:32, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
COM:TOYS No FoP for 3D models Ronhjones (Talk) 13:58, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
地域住民、通行者のプライバシー保護、危険性回避、安全性の観点から Quiet Wood and River (talk) 14:11, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
地域住民、通行者のプライバシー保護、安全性確保、危険性回避の観点から Quiet Wood and River (talk) 14:12, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: DW issue. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
less-quality(dark), 地域住民の安全性確保、プライバシー保護 Quiet Wood and River (talk) 14:16, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:29, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
施設利用者、教育機関のプライバシー保護、安全性確保 Quiet Wood and River (talk) 14:17, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no flagrant breach of security. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:29, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
施設利用者、近隣の住民に対する安全性確保、プライバシー保護 Quiet Wood and River (talk) 14:28, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no flagrant breach of security or privacy. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:28, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
This photo was downloaded from http://www.pakarmymuseum.com/exhibits/general-muhammad-musa/ without their permission, this photo must be deleted Shamsun N Tushar (talk) 14:39, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Jeff G., The photo can't be author's own work, it was stolen from the upper link. Shamsun N Tushar (talk) 03:05, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Gbawden, See the photo, visit the link and click on the image to see the full version, you will understand that the photo was downloaded from the website, it can't be the author's own work. Shamsun N Tushar (talk) 03:05, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- @E4024, See the above mentioned link, visit that, and click on the image to see the full version, you will come to know that the photo can't be author's own work. Shamsun N Tushar (talk) 03:13, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- Why Gbawden? What did our new admin do wrong again? (Some people send him goats etc... :) --E4024 (talk) 03:17, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete as DW with no prima facie indication of the portrait's true source, artist, country, or date of publication; it also has low resolution. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:42, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:21, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Historical photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.
- File:Festa de Nossa Senhora da Saúde em Lagoa Santa-MG - 1950 (Fonte- Acervo Prefeitura Municipal de Lagoa Santa).jpg
- File:Festa de Nossa Senhora da Saúde em Lagoa Santa-MG - 1930 (Fonte- Acervo Prefeitura Municipal de Lagoa Santa).jpg
- File:Peter lund-fotografia de Eugenius Warming (1865).jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:01, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:16, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
- Note: All files are PD: Restored and licenses fixed.-- Darwin Ahoy! 21:33, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Titouan Vayer (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagrams of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:04, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:15, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Most likely COM:NETCOPYVIO. See their talk page. 1989 (talk) 15:19, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: full size with EXIFs, no prior catches with google. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:13, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Small files without EXIF data, unlikely to be own works.
- File:Saree05.jpg
- File:Saree03.jpg
- File:Saree002.jpg
- File:Saree02.jpg
- File:Saree1.jpg
- File:Saree01.jpg
- File:Hotsaree.jpg
Yann (talk) 09:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination+likely out of scope. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:55, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Photos with Facebook exif data
- File:Yoshifumi Tsubota.jpg
- File:Tsubota.png
- File:Tsubota yoshifumi.jpg
- File:Tsubota.jpg
- File:Tsubota yoshifumi.png
Vera (talk) 09:59, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:52, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
low quality image Gopal1035 (talk) 10:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: used. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:53, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
low quality image Gopal1035 (talk) 10:05, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:53, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
low quality image Gopal1035 (talk) 10:05, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:53, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
low quality image Gopal1035 (talk) 10:05, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:54, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 11:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:36, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
no educational, 施設利用者の安全性確保、プライバシー保護 Quiet Wood and River (talk) 14:13, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 12:36, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
施設利用者のプライバシー保護、安全性確保 Quiet Wood and River (talk) 14:15, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Nomination rationale seems to be 'to protect privacy', but literally nobody is depicted. The park (which is for public use) might be closely surrounded by houses, but I don't see anyone's privacy might be invaded by this photo. whym (talk) 06:13, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 12:35, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
This photo has been downloaded from flickr.com without any permission from the author, therefore it must be deleted. Shamsun N Tushar (talk) 15:16, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep If the photo was published within 17 years of 1951 creation in Pakistan, then it is PD per {{PD-Pakistan}} and we don't need permission per COM:ART. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:53, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: Per JeffG. --Gbawden (talk) 12:35, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
@Gbawden: , This photo is lacking details information. RoksanaM (talk) 12:48, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
- Keep per previous DR. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 18:23, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
- okay, keep. RoksanaM (talk) 02:27, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 07:33, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
This photo has been downloaded from flickr.com but no permission has been granted for it to be published in wikimedia commons. As it was downloaded and uploaded without any permission from the author it should be deleted. Shamsun N Tushar (talk) 15:18, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep If the photo was published within 6 years of 1962 creation in Pakistan, then it is PD per {{PD-Pakistan}} and we don't need permission per COM:ART. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:56, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: Per JeffG. --Gbawden (talk) 12:35, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
This photo was downloaded from flickr.com, without any permission the photo has been uploaded in wikimedia commons, therefore it must be deleted. Shamsun N Tushar (talk) 15:22, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep If the photo was published within 21 years of 1947 creation in Pakistan, then it is PD per {{PD-Pakistan}} and we don't need permission per COM:ART. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:59, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: Per JeffG. --Gbawden (talk) 12:35, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Patrick Rogel as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Not found at URL. 1989 (talk) 03:47, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- FBMD at MD. --E4024 (talk) 02:11, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; not from an official PD source, found on twitter and FB. --Gbawden (talk) 12:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Patrick Rogel as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Not found at URL. 1989 (talk) 03:47, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Appears to be an official government file? Valereee (talk) 15:06, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- FBMD at MD. --E4024 (talk) 02:13, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; not from an official PD source, found on twitter and FB. --Gbawden. --Gbawden (talk) 12:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Patrick Rogel as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Not found at URL. 1989 (talk) 03:47, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- This file was cropped from a commons file to create a square photo -- is that not kosher? Valereee (talk) 12:16, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- FBMD at MD. It is neither kosher nor helal. --E4024 (talk) 02:14, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; not from an official PD source, found on twitter and FB. --Gbawden. --Gbawden (talk) 12:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
自動車のナンバープレートの写り込みによるプライバシーの保護必要性、教育施設のプライバシー保護の観点から Quiet Wood and River (talk) 08:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader requested deletion within 1 week from upload day. --Yasu (talk) 15:12, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
自動車ナンバーの写り込み、地域公園のプライバシー保護 Quiet Wood and River (talk) 09:31, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, as no license plates are visible. --Yasu (talk) 15:15, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
地域公園のプライバシー保護 Quiet Wood and River (talk) 09:32, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Nomination rationale seems to be 'to protect privacy', but literally nobody is depicted. The park (which is for public use) might be closely surrounded by houses, but I don't see anyone's privacy might be invaded by this photo. whym (talk) 06:10, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Kept: per whym. --Yasu (talk) 15:15, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
标题为“安定门”（西安），但该照片实际为“长乐门”。照片为西安城墙长乐门箭楼。楼牌匾一“旭日东升”，牌匾二“长乐阁”，二者均为长乐门箭楼特征。 碧海风 (talk) 00:55, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: file has been renamed to correct the misidentification. --Wcam (talk) 14:59, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:03, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
overedited Øyvind Holmstad (talk) 01:08, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader request on upload day. --Green Giant (talk) 02:26, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Unneeded and not-in-use duplication of the later version of File:נתן שלם.tif. After the cropping in the other file, this one is not needed anymore. Ldorfman (talk) 01:10, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Green Giant (talk) 02:27, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Low quality drawing with no educational value, not currently employed in any main space or article (posted only in a user's sandbox). AshFriday (talk) 01:17, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- I'd say Keep as it is technically in use, though I can't deduce how it's being used in that sandbox as it looks purely decorative. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 21:32, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Usage in a user sandbox is not what is normally meant by "in use on a wiki". --Green Giant (talk) 02:29, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
File:Saree002.jpg File:Saree05.jpg File:Saree03.jpg File:Saree02.jpg File:Hotsaree.jpg File:Saree01.jpg File:Saree1.jpg Rubi2020 (talk) 07:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Green Giant (talk) 02:31, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
неверное перенаправление Панн (talk) 09:42, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: No license, source, author or evidence of permission. --Green Giant (talk) 02:42, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
_Interviews_scenes_1.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_1.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 10:06, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
_Interviews_scenes_1.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Found elsewhere on the Internet. Unlikely to be own work. --Green Giant (talk) 02:40, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
_Interviews_scenes_1.jpg){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_2.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 10:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
_Interviews_scenes_2.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Found elsewhere on the Internet. Unlikely to be own work. --Green Giant (talk) 02:40, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
_Interviews_scenes_2.jpg){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_4.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_4.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 10:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
_Interviews_scenes_4.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Found elsewhere on the Internet. Unlikely to be own work. --Green Giant (talk) 02:39, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
_Interviews_scenes_4.jpg){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_5.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Interviews_scenes_5.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 10:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
_Interviews_scenes_5.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Found elsewhere on the Internet. Unlikely to be own work. --Green Giant (talk) 02:39, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
_Interviews_scenes_5.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
personal photo, less education value Gopal1035 (talk) 11:53, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Green Giant (talk) 02:45, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Same reason as per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Videos by Bandai Namco BevinKacon (talk) 12:39, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Green Giant (talk) 02:48, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Most likely derivative work. See their talk page,
- File:اهوار العراق 04.jpg
- File:اهوار العراق 01.jpg
- File:اهوار العراق 03.jpg
- File:اهوار العراق 02.jpg
- File:المحقق الميرداماد.jpg
- File:القسم الداخلي رقم 3.JPG
- File:احد قاعات القسم الداخلي رقم 3.JPG
- File:احدى غرف القسم الداخلي رقم 3.JPG
- File:الجناح الاول في القسم الداخلي.JPG
- File:حرم الامام الرضا عليه السلام.JPG
- File:Lumia-950xl.jpg
- File:جسر الحضارات.jpg
- File:مجاهدو الاهوار الذين قاوموا النظام العراقي.jpg
- File:شط العكيكة.jpg
- File:ناحية العكيكة.jpg
- File:لقطة من مكاني عالي في المدينة.jpg
- File:قاسم سليماني.jpg
- File:ابو الخصيب.jpg
- File:فاتح.jpg
- File:كلية الصيدلة جامعة البصرة.JPG
- File:ملعب كلية الصيدلة.JPG
- File:دورة علمية بخصوص الاقتباس في البحوث العلمية.jpg
- File:الدكتور عبد الاله عميد كلية الصيدلة.jpg
- File:فلكة في سوق الشيوخ.jpg
- File:القسم الداخلي 3.JPG
- File:الحاج هادي العامري.jpg
- File:العكيكة.jpg
- File:كورنيش العكيكة.jpg
- File:الجانب الايمن من المدينة.jpg
- File:مديرية ناحية العكيكة.jpg
- File:بلدية الناحية.jpg
- File:كورنيش ناحية العكيكة.jpg
- File:نخيل سوق الشيوخ.jpg
1989 (talk) 14:58, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Green Giant (talk) 02:49, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Appears to be a photo of an existing photo - copyright is with the original photo rather than the copy Nigel Ish (talk) 11:46, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Nigel Ish (talk) Personally, I am the author of this image and the owner of this photograph, which exists on paper in two copies. One copy hangs at my house on the wall (framed), and the other (worst quality) is glued into the album. A photograph from a photograph that is on my wall — I posted on Wikimedia Commons. Please do not delete it. I can provide the discussed photo from different angles so that you can be sure that it is mine. Never been published anywhere. Бабкинъ Михаилъ (talk) 11:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC).
Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 05:39, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
No hay licencia que justifique su uso libre 187.188.77.216 06:00, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Al ser una fotografía gubernamental, considero que la imagen es pública, como lo relacionado al gobierno mexicano.--Chiko elektriko (talk) 19:11, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, works created by the Mexican government do not default to being public domain. see Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Mexico/es#Government works. --Y.haruo (talk) 16:57, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
Redundant photo uploaded 2006, should be deleted and redirected to File:Firstflight 2 cropped.jpg as duplicate. BevinKacon (talk) 10:37, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: there are many versions of this photo in its category but this one is used a lot. P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:29, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Redundant transfer from French Wikipedia, should be deleted and redirected to File:Firstflight 2 cropped.jpg as duplicate. BevinKacon (talk) 10:38, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: very low quality. Redirected. P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:30, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Redundant downscale which is converted to black & white of File:Wright first flight.tif \ File:Wrightflyer highres.jpg. We already have plenty of high res restores which are all higher res than this in Category:First Flight, Kitty Hawk 1903. Not in use. BevinKacon (talk) 11:42, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as duplicate of File:Wrightflyer highres.jpg. Redirected. P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:33, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
possible dr of infortainment software Buckaroo bob 91 (talk) 19:24, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Hmm, what does "dr" mean? And what is the exact issue with this photo? --Basic.Master (talk) 20:23, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: mostly text and some standard symbols, no copyrightable items here. P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:37, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Nicotine_analytical_standard_(1).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Nicotine_analytical_standard_(1).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Slightly larger but more noticeably tilted than File:Sigma-Aldrich (-)Nicotine analytical standard (2).jpg...net "other is better, this has no use itself" DMacks (talk) 23:57, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Nicotine_analytical_standard_(1).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:38, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Nicotine_analytical_standard_(1).jpg){kind=link}
Non-standard calligraphy with creativity involved (shape of the original character changed to make the text similar to a section of railway), therefore under copyright protection according to COM:TOO#China. Previous deletion case can be seen here. Siyuwj (talk) 08:12, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Duplicate file of File:Ningbo_Rail_Transit1.jpg. VulpesVulpes825 (talk) 08:22, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per VulpesVulpes825. Ruthven (msg) 17:12, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
File:The First Successful Aircraft Flights by the Wright Brothers in the United States, 1903 Q83938.jpg
[edit]
Redundant photo as part of mass upload, see Category:First Flight, Kitty Hawk 1903. Not in use. BevinKacon (talk) 10:38, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Perfect to illustrative deliberate copyfraud by the IWM, despite their lawyer having this photo highlighted. --Fæ (talk) 10:48, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Please provide the source of a lawyer highlighting this specific photo.--BevinKacon (talk) 11:30, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: not exact duplicate. Ruthven (msg) 17:13, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
And File:Кухта Константин Яковлевич.jpg
Not own images uploaded as own works. Scanned images. Микола Василечко (talk) 18:00, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Здравствуйте Люди ошиблись в подписании, фото то используется. А что нужно изменить? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 93.74.1.219 (talk) 14:14, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Два файла изменено на "Собственное сканированное изображение". Просим убрать удаление. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prichina (talk • contribs) 17:32, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Also user Prichina probably user Samumray. Uploaded files created by the same camera, see
- File:Kasja Jasna-Julyja-Dubikovskaja.jpg - uploaded user Prichina - camera Panasonic DMC-TZ8(!)
- File:Kasja Jasna.jpg - uploaded user Samumray - camera Panasonic DMC-TZ8(!)
and edited same page. Prichina this is your second profile Samumray? You are Кася Ясна? --Микола Василечко (talk) 18:03, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 17:14, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Non-standard calligraphy with creativity involved (shape of the original character changed to make the text similar to a section of railway), therefore under copyright protection according to COM:TOO#China. Previous deletion case can be seen here. Siyuwj (talk) 08:25, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep There is no visible characters in the logo, just simple geometry shape (Lines forming as an ordinary track and a line on a track). This met the threshold of origin according to COM:TOO#China. The previous deletion discussion should not be considered here due to the fact that the previous image is deleted based on original uploader's request. VulpesVulpes825 (talk) 18:42, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete The logo is an artistic reformation of Chinese character 甬 given this news, therefore it is not formed by simple geometry shape. According to the 道 case and other deletion cases involving artistic formation of Chinese calligraphy, this file should be copyvio. - Siyuwj (talk) 02:38, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, in the link you provided, all of the image is no longer accessible. In other word, without further evidence proving that the logo is based on characters, this logo should be kept due to simple geometry shape (forming like a track and one line go through half way as a train). Even if the logo is based on a character, it is still way different than the 道 case since the logo is way deformed due to artistic reasons that the the logo does not look like 甬 at all. The significant difference between 甬 and the logo makes it under the threshold of originality in both US and Chinese and thus should not be deleted. VulpesVulpes825 (talk) 22:50, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
- Then this reference do provide the design initiatives. Please DO NOT BASE ALL YOUR ARGUMENTS ON ILLUSIONS. If you think 道 is complex enough, just take a look at the simple LY case and other cases. - Siyuwj (talk) 02:30, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- User:Siyuwj Please do not shout at me. It is extremely rude to do so. This case is different than the LY case you mentioned since this logo do not assemble any typography in both Chinese and English. I am not base my arguments on illusion, this is simple fact that the logo only use three 45 degree lines and two vertical lines. There is no trace of 甬 in this logo. This means that it no longer follow the LY case and 道 case since the logo nominated for delete does not involve any obvious typography or calligraphy. As I mentioned above, the logo should be kept due to containing simple geometry shape and no obvious typography nor calligraphy. -- VulpesVulpes825 (Talk) (Please keep the whole conversation at where it starts) 00:33, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- This is obviously not simple shape. Firstly, I have provided RELIABLE SOURCES stating that the shape is based on the Chinese character with artistic idea above the threshold of originality, that is, to reshape the character into the shape of rail tracks, while you are still pretending being blind to these sources and insisting that the shape have nothing to do with the character. Secondly, the middle line from top-right to the bottom-left has a semicircle at its head, and ends with a curve at its end, which resembles the same structure in the Chinese character 甬, implying that it is not a simple shape but a specially-designed typography for this logo. - Siyuwj (talk) 02:59, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- Once again, it is unnecessary to bold text, which is equivalent to shouting at person. You said yourself that the logo is shaped as rail tracks. The currently argument you and I have is that I think this logo's character it originally based on is too distorted that it not longer clearly assemble the word 甬, especially the top part フ and the dot after フ, which is the main distinguishable visual component for this Chinese character. By not having obvious depiction of the top part of the Chinese characters, it no longer follow the LY case and 道 case since the logo nominated for delete does not involve any obvious typography or calligraphy. As for the reference, it seems that [6] and [7] is the same and the second link's description comes after the author signature. I am not sure pieces after the signature counts, which similar to cite advertisement after the article signature and count as a news article. It is indeed a blurry line. As summary, neither of us are the Chinese intellectual judge, so I express my opinion based on what I see and compare that to the COM:TOO#China, which the logo follow COM:TOO#China since the logo do not have obvious typography or calligraphy. Unless we have a Chinese court judge's decision, this discussion may end up as inconclusive since both of us have huge opinion as whether the degree of distortion of Chinese character in the logo still have obvious depiction of 甬 as a whole or not. VulpesVulpes825 (talk) 03:53, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- This is obviously not simple shape. Firstly, I have provided RELIABLE SOURCES stating that the shape is based on the Chinese character with artistic idea above the threshold of originality, that is, to reshape the character into the shape of rail tracks, while you are still pretending being blind to these sources and insisting that the shape have nothing to do with the character. Secondly, the middle line from top-right to the bottom-left has a semicircle at its head, and ends with a curve at its end, which resembles the same structure in the Chinese character 甬, implying that it is not a simple shape but a specially-designed typography for this logo. - Siyuwj (talk) 02:59, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- User:Siyuwj Please do not shout at me. It is extremely rude to do so. This case is different than the LY case you mentioned since this logo do not assemble any typography in both Chinese and English. I am not base my arguments on illusion, this is simple fact that the logo only use three 45 degree lines and two vertical lines. There is no trace of 甬 in this logo. This means that it no longer follow the LY case and 道 case since the logo nominated for delete does not involve any obvious typography or calligraphy. As I mentioned above, the logo should be kept due to containing simple geometry shape and no obvious typography nor calligraphy. -- VulpesVulpes825 (Talk) (Please keep the whole conversation at where it starts) 00:33, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
- Then this reference do provide the design initiatives. Please DO NOT BASE ALL YOUR ARGUMENTS ON ILLUSIONS. If you think 道 is complex enough, just take a look at the simple LY case and other cases. - Siyuwj (talk) 02:30, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
- User KirikLU consulted Ningbo Rail Transit Group (the owner of the logo) and they replied that the logo is examined and registered by Copyright Protection Center of China (中国版权保护中心), therefore it is copyrighted and above the threshold of originality. More information can be consulted at http://zxts.zjzwfw.gov.cn/wsdt/ (may only accept consults in Chinese). You may also query these information in [8]. - Siyuwj (talk) 05:47, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, in the link you provided, all of the image is no longer accessible. In other word, without further evidence proving that the logo is based on characters, this logo should be kept due to simple geometry shape (forming like a track and one line go through half way as a train). Even if the logo is based on a character, it is still way different than the 道 case since the logo is way deformed due to artistic reasons that the the logo does not look like 甬 at all. The significant difference between 甬 and the logo makes it under the threshold of originality in both US and Chinese and thus should not be deleted. VulpesVulpes825 (talk) 22:50, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per Siyuwj. Copyright registered with local authority. --Wcam (talk) 11:56, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 01:43, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
@1Veertje: en @Alexis Jazz: is deze poster te simplistisch om auteursrechtelijk beschermt te worden? Ik heb hem geüploaded om er een standaard voor te maken voordat ik meer foto's van dit soort posters maak. Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 15:10, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- @Donald Trung: als dit symbolen zijn die ze "geleend" hebben van Duitse verkeersborden is het okay.. Anders niet, denk ik. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 16:50, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- Oh wacht, {{FoP-NL}}, doh. Weet niet zeker of dat van toepassing is op posters, maar ik gok van wel. Of ruimen ze die krengen na de verkiezingen ook weer op? Dan nog, iedere poster die ze niet verwijderen valt dan onder FoP. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 16:52, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Alexis Jazz: , {{FoP-NL}} is alleen van toepassing op permanente kunstwerken, posters zijn tijdelijk. Ik kan gelijkwaardige iconen op Wikimedia Commons vinden en ik denk dat de golf 🏄🏻 waarschijnlijk te simplistisch is, maar ik weet het niet zeker van die vis 🎣 en die kerel in de waterdruppel.
--Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 17:07, 16 February 2019 (UTC) - Vera houdt zich normaliter altijd met dit soort vragen beter dus wacht ik ook nog op haar oordeel sinds zij een expert in dit soort vragen is, maar jij bent ook op best veel auteursrechtelijke gebieden. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 17:09, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Donald Trung: als die posters worden opgehangen zonder enige intentie om ze na de verkiezingen ook weer te verwijderen dan kan dat mogelijk als permanent worden gezien. Maar 100% zeker ben ik niet. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 19:24, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Alexis Jazz: , {{FoP-NL}} is alleen van toepassing op permanente kunstwerken, posters zijn tijdelijk. Ik kan gelijkwaardige iconen op Wikimedia Commons vinden en ik denk dat de golf 🏄🏻 waarschijnlijk te simplistisch is, maar ik weet het niet zeker van die vis 🎣 en die kerel in de waterdruppel.
Deleted: likley non-permanent. --JuTa 01:45, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Foto není aktuální, je tedy neplatné, prosím o smazání. Děkuji R.L. RomanLindner (talk) 18:52, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- The listed image is not a photo. The reason for deletion is not valid. --ŠJů (talk) 17:23, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --JuTa 01:47, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}