Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2019/08/12

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

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

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Archive
Archive August 12th, 2019
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Brunthanraghav (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Seems to be used for self promo on en.wiki

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 03:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --1989 (talk) 16:34, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

https://www.peoplelife.ru/images/catalog/img_item_320440.jpg копирайт Пашка123 (talk) 12:12, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Sealle (talk) 14:15, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:48, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Oos (msali raso 16:42, 12 August 2019 (UTC)) msali raso 16:42, 12 August 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by أحمد الحيدي القرمودي (talk • contribs) 16:42, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Clearly previously published - see File:2019 margazine publication.jpg. --Эlcobbola talk 19:29, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ce fichier est inutile Azraelle29 (talk) 11:46, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Storkk at 17:14, 12 August 2019 UTC: Likely copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing. If you are the copyright holder, please follow the instructions on OTRS. --Krdbot 19:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Fichier remplacé par un fichier non tagué Azraelle29 (talk) 11:46, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Storkk at 17:14, 12 August 2019 UTC: Likely copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing. If you are the copyright holder, please follow the instructions on OTRS. --Krdbot 19:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Fichier inutile Azraelle29 (talk) 11:47, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Storkk at 17:14, 12 August 2019 UTC: Likely copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing. If you are the copyright holder, please follow the instructions on OTRS. --Krdbot 19:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

fichier inutile Azraelle29 (talk) 11:48, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Storkk at 17:14, 12 August 2019 UTC: Likely copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing. If you are the copyright holder, please follow the instructions on OTRS. --Krdbot 19:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo with sensitive info. used in a en article which is already csd'd Viztor (talk) 12:55, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Jon Kolbert at 14:53, 12 August 2019 UTC: ' --Krdbot 19:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

error de carga Intitv (talk) 17:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: COM:CSD#G7. --4nn1l2 (talk) 00:40, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wrong language in Descr Pankoken (talk) 18:56, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:52, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wrong language in Descr Pankoken (talk) 18:57, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:52, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

already in database Rob v. Oirschot (talk) 20:00, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:42, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of scope Joschi71 (talk) 16:17, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by EugeneZelenko at 14:34, 14 August 2019 UTC: Commons:Licensing: album cover --Krdbot 19:27, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Redundant PNG version of South Korean flag. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 03:46, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: speedy delete as duplicate of File:Southkoreaflag.png. P 1 9 9   03:28, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Promotional purposes, out of project scope Cjp24 (talk) 20:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: G10. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:37, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

no copyright information, just because the suspect is deceased does not make this photo in the public domain Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 23:28, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This photo is okay --unsigned edit made by FaZeBlueThunderShocker
Based on what? This photo seems to have been taken from his social media. That does not make it in the commons, even if he is dead. I will let someone more experienced than either of us comment on this, and make the final call.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 20:14, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 13:26, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

copyright issue, this photo appears to have come from the suspect's social media, is it public domain? Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 23:29, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is from the suspects social media. Also the suspect is dead making it okay to have on wikipedia.FaZeBlueThunderShocker (talk) 01:10, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Taking the photo from his social media does not mean that the photo is in the commons, even if he is dead.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 20:09, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 13:27, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Nabin K. Sapkota (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Copyright violation - False claim - Not an own work - Unlikely to be the author of the files - No permission - See EXIF and/or Metadata: Someone else is copyright holder - Speedy deletion would be appreciative - Not likely to exist here on Commons. Kind regards,

— Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 14:24, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Tulsi Bhagat, could you please elaborate the reason of deletion these images. All the images are my own contributions along with my camera nickname included in EXif files. Is there any photographs matched and claimed by any other photographers as their contributions? Please let me know the if any before you move ahead. -Nabin K. Sapkota (talk) 15:48, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Nabin K. Sapkota, sorry, I've missed your ping. As you told, no there isn't any photographs matched and claimed by any other photographers as their contributions but see COM:CARES: Commons cares about copyright even when a copyright owner does not. I noticed that you are the subject of various photographs. I believe, metadata never lie. As, it explains someone else as copyright holder and sole owner of the photos. Please send permission via COM:OTRS. Feel free to ping me if you are still unclear. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 08:22, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi User:Tulsi Bhagat, could you please follow the Discussion page and instant comments as of 12 August, 2019 for further more clearance, if there's still problem with it please let me know another way to move ahead. -Nabin K. Sapkota (talk) 13:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: See talk page, and after discussing on IRC with Tulsi. --Yann (talk) 14:29, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Arikim123 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

per COM:OOS

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 15:00, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 17:06, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of COM:SCOPE Ahmadtalk 16:21, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: and a copyright violation. --JuTa 21:19, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not used, changed idea 162.213.38.25 19:24, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Yann at 05:05, 17 August 2019 UTC: per COM:SPEEDY --Krdbot 01:16, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

OOS résumé.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 01:41, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:16, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Yacobgabriel2019 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

per COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Personal/Private photo(s).

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 03:25, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:16, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Mohit Kabir (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Seems to be used for self promo on hi.wiki

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 03:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:17, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of COM:SCOPE - COM:HOST DannyS712 (talk) 10:33, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:18, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo of no educational value. Viztor (talk) 12:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:18, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo of no educational value, not used in anywhere. Viztor (talk) 12:33, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:18, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal photo Viztor (talk) 12:47, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:19, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No encyclopedic relevance. Not used. Kameraad Pjotr 12:49, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:19, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

If this is the same as the deleted upload (identical file name), then this must be deleted over out of COM:SCOPE concerns. Also, may lean towards Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion#General reasons, G4. Recreation of content previously deleted per community consensus (if the image depicts the very same subject as that of the deleted file way back 2019). Note that it is currently not used in any Wikimedia website or article as of this initiation of this deletion request. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:09, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy  Keep Not this again, how many times is it needed to show that this images are in scope? A template like the one below is not enought?

The scope is pretty much established so there is no valid reason to delete and Commons is not censored. How many times is it needed to repeat the same conclusions. These file is clearly educational and not being of your liking is not a reason to delete. Its parent category. Category:Project "Geekography" by Exey Panteleev (nude portrayals of computer technology) clearly states its scope and educational use:

Project by Exey Panteleev, as an artistic project that connects technology and nude photography. This project has been a Winner of The Best of Russia 2011 (and selected as one of the 55 best between 309 winners), an photographic award organized by the Moscow Contemporary Art Center Winzavod with the support of the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, and has been nominated in 2011, 2012 and 2013 in the american International Colour Awards.

This project that have been covered by several newspapers, magazines and technolgy websites, like the The Next Web , GQ Italy and the french newspaper Libération, that have made articles about this project, besides being interviewed to an interview to the tech page of Mail.Ru where he talks about his project. Besides these newspapers and tech sites, other covered this same project, like being news in Reflex, was the cover of the Russian "Hacker Magazine" of January 2012 was by him" or of the ukrainian "SHO Art Magazine" of July\August 2012.

Because of the subjects of this projects, Violet Blue, "an American journalist, author, editor, advisor, and educator" covered this same project and had photos published in "nude art photography" book."

This educational purpose has clearly been established since November of 2019, when there was an covert attempt to sequester the Wikiconference 2019 and an concerted attempt to delete this images, with allegations of mysogeny, uneducational subjects, situation that was reject by vast majority in Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2019/11#Category:Nude_portrayals_of_computer_technology.

Also there were several deletion requests, with the same arguments, closed as kept and invalid reasoning to opening those deletion requests, like Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fake News (48708611322).jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Body painting - z-index.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Binary prefixes (41983361972).jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Body painting - before.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:HTML output - Exey Panteleev.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Erlang (9690003046).jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Body painting - display.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Full Stack (Exey Panteleev).jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:RSS feed icons painted on a naked woman (by Exey Panteleev).jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Body painting - QR code.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bling-bling - iframe.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Body painting - Proxy.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Body painting - MongoDB's "WHERE".jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Radio button and female nude.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Body painting - float left right.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:SQL - DROP TABLE.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bling-bling - iframe.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:TypeScript bodypaint (15003177534).jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dogecoin (46535190611).jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Nude portrayals of computer technology. Clearly not a single valid reason to delete.

This kind of deletions are so recurrent that a template {{GeekographyDRs(kept)}} was created, but it seems that even this is not enough. Tm (talk) 12:44, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Close as Kept per above. Part of photo series by notable photographer. (Ideally should have gone through undeletion request rather than being reuploaded, but initial request seems incorrectly decided as not OOS, per other images and groups of photos in same series kept earlier.) -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:50, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Nadliw45 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

per COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Personal/Private photo(s)

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 14:05, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:20, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

per COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Personal/Private photo(s). Unused. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 14:16, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:21, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal file. As such, oos. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 14:25, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:21, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:21, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:48, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:21, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:EDUSE (msali raso 16:49, 12 August 2019 (UTC)) msali raso 16:49, 12 August 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by أحمد الحيدي القرمودي (talk • contribs) 16:49, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:23, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Saikat Das2 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of COM:SCOPE

Ahmadtalk 17:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:23, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by K.Pilla313 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Seems to be used for self promo on en.wiki.

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 14:04, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:09, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:PACKAGING.

Yuraily Lic (talk) 14:39, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:08, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:08, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Commercial advertisement, SPAM: out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 14:57, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:07, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:PACKAGING.

Yuraily Lic (talk) 14:58, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low resolution and no EXIF data. Uploader is totally untrustworthy, with multiple copyvios, so unlikely to be own work per COM:PCP. ~Cybularny Speak? 15:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Gustavo SilveiraLO (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Screenshots.

Patrick Rogel (talk) 15:08, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:03, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Oos (msali raso 16:45, 12 August 2019 (UTC)) msali raso 16:45, 12 August 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by أحمد الحيدي القرمودي (talk • contribs) 16:45, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:56, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

site content is copyrighted: https://www.slovoidilo.ua/ VoidWanderer (talk) 16:47, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No evidence provided to say Carousel Productions, Inc.has released this under a CC licence. –Davey2010Talk 17:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

copyvio, artist died1987, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:24, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:50, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


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

copyvio, artist died 1987, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:25, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:50, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


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

copyvio, artist died 1987, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:25, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:50, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


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

copyvio, artist died 1987, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:25, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:50, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


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

copyvio, artist died 1987, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:50, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


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

copyvio, artist died 1987, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:50, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


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

copyvio, artist died 1987, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:50, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


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

this is a copyrighted image from GeoExpro magazine: https://www.geoexpro.com/articles/2013/06/once-upon-a-red-line-the-iraq-petroleum-company-story 33ttrydam (talk) 18:48, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:48, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Appears to have been published at http://groupef.ae/ Ytoyoda (talk) 19:16, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please delete. This image is now published and copyrighted. Image was earlier provided by a friend who was the official photographer on the picture prior to being uploaded on the website. Thank you. --Wikiemirati (talk) 22:39, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:47, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Absolutely not own work given the time this was taken. PlanespotterA320 (talk) 19:36, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:47, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Illegible sketch. Unused file. No educational value Malcolma (talk) 19:41, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:47, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

not own work, uploaded by new user with other copyvios PlanespotterA320 (talk) 19:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:46, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

not own work (photo very old and low res, so not family album), uploaded by new user with other copyvios PlanespotterA320 (talk) 19:51, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:46, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope and uploaded to illustrate a test article on FR Wikipedia by a new user. Bastenbas (talk) 21:04, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:45, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not probably uploader's original work. 194.228.20.173 21:28, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:44, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not probably uploader's original work. 194.228.20.173 21:30, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:43, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:PACKAGING. Yuraily Lic (talk) 23:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:42, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ce fichier est inutile Azraelle29 (talk) 11:45, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyvio. --Didym (talk) 11:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

fichier inutile Azraelle29 (talk) 11:47, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyvio. --Didym (talk) 11:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Yuraily Lic (talk) 11:49, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small size, unsharp, unidentifiable, will probably never be used. Mhohner (talk) 11:51, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:19, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted advertisement. Yuraily Lic (talk) 11:53, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:19, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

copyrighted logo that fails COM:FAIRUSE see wikipage DBigXray 12:09, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:18, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Didym, nope, the image is still not deleted. DBigXray 07:35, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

COM:PACKAGING. Yuraily Lic (talk) 12:20, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Packaging. It's OK to delete it.--HQA02330 (talk) 20:46, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:18, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seems to be a blank file (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 03:26, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:13, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Valentim0106 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Copyrighted characters from DOWK. May be fair use.

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 03:29, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:13, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Valentim0106 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Copyrighted characters.

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 10:56, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination.  JGHowes  talk 17:45, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Yuraily Lic (talk) 03:30, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:11, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Yuraily Lic (talk) 03:33, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:11, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Byunshii1412 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Complex art. Permission should be given via OTRS

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 03:33, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:09, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Yuraily Lic (talk) 03:34, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:09, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Ari Nurahman (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Recently uploaded PNGs that are redundant to their SVG counterparts.

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 03:40, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:08, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image found at https://music.apple.com/gb/album/bekim-kumanova/1451824239, no evidence of ownership Ytoyoda (talk) 03:49, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:07, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photo credited to Concrete Marketing: https://www.thedailytimes.com/entertainment/girl-power-butcher-babies-frontwomen-push-back-against-metal-stereotypes/article_f37c197d-5c41-50e9-a6ae-62a91e54dfd0.html Ytoyoda (talk) 03:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:07, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Selfie of subject, definitely not own work. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 03:53, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is overlaid on Google Maps. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:53, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:07, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image credit says "FPS Kolkata" Ytoyoda (talk) 03:57, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

EXIF says "MARIO A.MARTINEZ VLZ." Ytoyoda (talk) 03:58, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

EXIF says "FBMD", taken from Facebook Ytoyoda (talk) 03:59, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:05, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No real value - just a meme. Frood (talk) 04:14, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:05, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Appears to be a copyrighted publicity image Edithian (talk) 04:34, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:04, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Tagged as own work, but is derivative of other images. It is unclear where these elements originate from, who the copyright holders are, and if those images were released under a free license.

ƏXPLICIT 05:37, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:02, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

The image is out of scope. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 06:24, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:01, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted character. Yuraily Lic (talk) 07:11, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:01, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused image. Unlikely to have been created by upoloader Malcolma (talk) 08:46, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 12:01, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Errejay (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Web quality images, containing no source and assumes it's all uploader's own work. Most images listed have already appeared on the internet prior to upload here, therefore a copyright violation. OTRS permission required, especially images having camera metadata.

theinstantmatrix (talk) 10:16, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:58, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope, somebody's random selfie Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:57, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted advertisement. Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:21, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:57, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photo of photo, missing permission. Patrick Rogel (talk) 10:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:57, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted posters. Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:30, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:56, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted posters. Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:30, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 11:56, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Works of Niki de Saint Phalle who died in 2002, works protected until 1 Jan 2073 (minimum)

Withdrawn

[edit]

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 05:25, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--AFBorchert (talk) 06:02, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@AFBorchert: for {{FoP-Switzerland}} depicted works must not be 3D. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 06:09, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@大诺史: Please read the original law in the English translation:
The depiction may not be three-dimensional and it may not serve the same purpose as the original.
As the photos are two-dimensional we do not have a problem. --AFBorchert (talk) 06:23, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep FoP will apply to most of these. As the nominator seems unaware of this, they should withdraw the nomination. I second the comment about bulk scatter-gun nominations like this being disruputive and a significant time sink for other editors. Andy Dingley (talk) 06:36, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Why then have you not withdrawn File:La Grande Lune.JPG ? Andy Dingley (talk) 07:08, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Andy Dingley: Done. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 07:29, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There is NO justification for deleting photos taken in a public park. I suggest you study the matter more carefully, and if necessary consult with the Israeli admins who have done a thorough study of such matters.--Gilabrand (talk) 07:37, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Gilabrand: I've already withdrawn those related to Germany/Switzerland/Israel, while for others, FOP does not apply. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 07:47, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've already withdrew a majority of the files from DR and reverted my edits on the associated pages. Sorry for the mess created. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 08:05, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
You should also withdraw photographs made in the Netherlands (because of FOP). Vysotsky (talk) 08:47, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Meaning: File:Niki de St. Phalle in Stedelijk Museum . Een der Nans in de tuin, Bestanddeelnr 920-6197.jpg. Vysotsky (talk) 08:59, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Vysotsky: Done. Thanks for pointing out. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 09:02, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
--AFBorchert (talk) 09:11, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@AFBorchert: I believe that the edit conflict was me moving File:Niki de St. Phalle in Stedelijk Museum . Een der Nans in de tuin, Bestanddeelnr 920-6197.jpg to the wd section. And once again, thank you guys for cleaning my mess. --Regards (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 09:18, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted some, Kept others, per detailed discussion above. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:35, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

1) I am Tristan Holup 2) I do not like this photo 3) While I don't really care that much, I just saw the photo and would prefer if it was taken down. LOL 24.228.2.187 05:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. No in scope usefulness, possibly intended as joke/prank/silly insult. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:40, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

bad picture Pacopac (talk) 05:59, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted prompt uploader request. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:43, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by GCW1958 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Not own work.

Patrick Rogel (talk) 10:44, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --1989 (talk) 14:06, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by GCW1958 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Low-re images, unlikely to be own works.

Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:52, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:28, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by DZwarrior1 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

None of these is licensed peroperly.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:14, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One restored, as per [1]. Yann (talk) 06:32, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by DR Davydov (talk · contribs)

[edit]

DR Davydov is not the creator of these images and can not publish them under a free licence! If you are the actual photographer of Galperin Vladimir Grigorievich 1981.jpg please send us an email to OTRS for proving this, COM:PCP.

Ras67 (talk) 23:41, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:50, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted advertisement. Yuraily Lic (talk) 23:48, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:48, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted work. Yuraily Lic (talk) 23:52, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:48, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted character. Yuraily Lic (talk) 23:29, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by 1989 at 04:11, 21 August 2019 UTC: per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:R2-D2 --Krdbot 07:06, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Sign was created after 1989 and is protected by copyright. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 15:11, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:06, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright info on e-varamu.ee is not reliable. This site mirrors almost all content from muis.ee using CC BY-SA 3.0, while muis.ee itself mentions this license rarely, if at all. For the following images muis.ee instead says "Copyright not evaluated"[2]. So there is little reason to believe that these images are under free license. Their generic copyright page says that if "digital image itself is copyrighted work, permission for use should be obtained from the owner of the copyright".

Pikne 16:28, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:05, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photograph of a copyrighted work of art, taken in the United States. While the photographer has released her rights, there has been no release of the underlying artist's copyright. There is no freedom of panorama or other applicable exception to copyright in the United States which would allow the photographer;s release alone to make this a free image. The LOC notice regarding the photographer's release expressly notes that the artist's copyright may still be in force. Therefore, this is not a free image. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (talk) 16:52, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:02, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No source. No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 17:59, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:59, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

As a photograph published in 2017, does not meet any criteria for {{PD-United Arab Emirates}}. Ytoyoda (talk) 19:46, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. This photo was uploaded by the state-run WAM agency but not the official government. My impression of uploading it was it met the official document requirements. Go ahead and delete it. Thank you. --Wikiemirati (talk) 22:36, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:57, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

False license Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:56, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

False license. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:33, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:56, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

False license Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:33, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:55, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

False license Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:33, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:56, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted maps.

Yuraily Lic (talk) 02:53, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:19, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

EXIF credits GuacamoleProject.com as copyright holder Ytoyoda (talk) 04:00, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ytoyoda. I am the author of the photo; My professional signature as a photographer is "Guacamole Project" and my site is GuacamoleProject.com (I use the URL of my site as credit for my photos). What is the problem or what should I do to validate the file? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WakamouL (talk • contribs) 01:58, August 12, 2019‎ (UTC)
@WakamouL: Hi, thanks for the clarification, and now I see your how user name and your website domain name match. I'll withdraw this nomination, and you could also go through the COM:OTRS process so other Commons users know that work from your website is freely licensed. Sorry for the trouble! Ytoyoda (talk) 14:44, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ytoyoda: No problem. In fact, the same bassist asked me to upload it to Commons so he could use it with rights. WakamouL (talk) 15:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: withdrawn. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:18, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted map. Yuraily Lic (talk) 04:34, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:18, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted map. Yuraily Lic (talk) 04:35, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:17, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Created by user blocked for impersonating admin. Don Spencertalk-to-me 05:15, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

see also {{Boldmono}}. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 05:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done added nom. Don Spencertalk-to-me 23:35, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:16, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted character. Yuraily Lic (talk) 11:55, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:13, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted advertisement. Yuraily Lic (talk) 12:18, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This photo has a advertisement. It's ok to delete it.

--HQA02330 (talk) 20:34, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:12, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

work of north korean government, possibly not public domain 73.92.132.7 14:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete It's not clear that this is a work of the North Korean government. In which case it is not public domain. Even if it is a work of the North Korean government, their laws extend copyright if the work is intended for commercial use which this post card likely was (see Commons:Copyright rules by territory/North Korea). I think it's far more likely than not that this work is under copyright and so should err on the side of delete. Wugapodes (talk) 20:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:11, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Wikiemirati (talk · contribs)

[edit]

“FBMD” in EXIF indicates these were downloaded from Facebook. Please provide the link for where they were previously published plus verification of their license status to COM:OTRS.

Ytoyoda (talk) 11:38, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. These are all private photos originally posted in my instagram account. These photos are either taken by me or from my close group of friends whom I know personally and have provided me with permission to re-use their images. I am not aware if any of those were published into facebook. Will provide license status through OTRS. Thanks --Wikiemirati (talk) 11:49, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:11, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Wikiemirati (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Published at https://twitter.com/imayeed/status/969142198250934272?s=21 prior to upload at Commons. Uploader should follow the steps described at COM:OTRS to verify license.

Ytoyoda (talk) 19:41, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I no longer have the original uploads of these photos prior to publishing on twitter, so you may go ahead and delete them from commons. Thank you --Wikiemirati (talk) 22:34, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:56, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission.. Possibly PD in Pakistan... photograph is from 1951, and Pakstani copyright law protects photographs for 50 years after publication. Can we find out when the photograph was first published? Storkk (talk) 17:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: still no license. --Jcb (talk) 15:40, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

The YouTube video source is no longer available because the associated account was suspended for "multiple third-party claims of copyright infringement". Although the video and its license was archived, it's impossible to determine if the uploader truly was the copyright holder considering the circumstances of the YouTube channel. ƏXPLICIT 05:47, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted per nom. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 04:47, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This picture is no longer being used in articles and thus is not relevant Andrew1829 (talk) 17:58, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted per uploader request within days of upload; orphan photo. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 04:41, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Due to privacy reason, I request for images of myself (that I uploaded in the past) be deleted from Commons. ...Kenrick95 13:31, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Courtesy deletion of personal photo. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:50, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Due to privacy reason, I request for images of myself (that I uploaded in the past) be deleted from Commons. ...Kenrick95 13:31, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Courtesy deletion of personal photo. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:50, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Due to privacy reason, I request for images of myself (that I uploaded in the past) be deleted from Commons. ...Kenrick95 13:31, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Courtesy deletion of personal photo. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:50, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Due to privacy reason, I request for images of myself (that I uploaded in the past) be deleted from Commons. ...Kenrick95 13:31, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Courtesy deletion of personal photo. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:50, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:PACKAGING.

Yuraily Lic (talk) 13:13, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I was brought here from a deletion tag link on File:Orangina Zéro.jpg, which is not listed above. Anyway, keep too. Photograph of whole bottle. -- Asclepias (talk) 02:50, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Asclepias, thank you! It might be my operation mistake. I will add it. --Yuraily Lic (talk) 15:38, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adding,

--Yuraily Lic (talk) 15:43, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep per COM:PACKAGING.
Will you please stop making these invalid nominations which merely show how you do not understand the subtleties of these issues. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:24, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This package contains illustration. --Yuraily Lic (talk) 14:50, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but just repeating the simplest statement of the nomination isn't enough. The situation is more complex than that, and yet (per your many DRs and the AN/U thread) you seem incapable of understanding this. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:42, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:50, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted advertisement and book covers. Yuraily Lic (talk) 04:56, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted per nom. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:23, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright violation. It’s a safe assumption that he architect did not die before 1949 Headlock0225 (talk) 06:15, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:26, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

too many similar pictures Pacopac (talk) 06:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted prompt uploader request. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:26, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted advertisements. Yuraily Lic (talk) 08:55, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:27, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Derivative work of a copyrighted leaflet A1Cafel (talk) 09:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:28, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Aikaleido (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:DW. Copyrighted maps.

Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:16, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:29, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Official symbol. Proper license tag should be used if it's in public domain. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:52, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted License claim not supported by source page. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:53, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted work. Árna (talk) 16:35, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted also orphan -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:54, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

I created by mistake. Intended to crop original, User-duck (talk) 16:38, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted prompt request by uploader. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:54, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Bjanczak (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Seems to be used for self promo on pl.wiki

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 03:53, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 09:04, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Gazouya-japan (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:DW. Copyrighted maps and signboards.

Yuraily Lic (talk) 04:45, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


この度、私の作品が削除審議との事で、一言申し上げます。
この作品は日本国内の公共的な港湾施設または、鉄道貨物駅の一角で、「 この施設をアピールしたいので、不特定多数の人々の目に留まるように 」 と言う設置者の意向でわざわざ公道に沿った場所に設置されおり、これを踏まえて撮影しました。
つまり 「 被写体が恒常的に公共の場所に置かれている 」 に該当する、「 Freedom of panorama 」 であると理解して、作品ページにも関連するタグを表示しておりますので、宜しくお願いいたします。
なお、勝手ながら私は自身のページにも記しています様に、日本語以外は一切理解できませんし、また翻訳ソフトを使ってみましたがこれも殆ど理解不能の結果だらけになりますので、それらの点を何卒、ご理解をお願い申し上げます。--Gazouya-japan (talk) 22:17, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
User:Gazouya-japan, please read Commons:二次的著作物 about derivative works. --Yuraily Lic (talk) 08:27, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: unfortunately there is no Freedom of Panorama for non-buildings in Japan. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 09:06, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Nirmal Dulal (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Small images without EXIF data, please upload the original files, or send a permission via COM:OTRS.

Yann (talk) 18:27, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 18:59, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Nirmal Dulal (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Copyright violation - False claim - Not an own work - Unlikely to be the author of the files - No permission - See EXIF and/or Metadata: Someone else is copyright holder - Speedy deletion would be appreciative - Not likely to exist here on Commons. Kind regards,

— Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 15:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tulsi Bhagat, for your information these picture were taken with my personal camera and the name "Babin" in metadata of these picture is name of my nephew "Babin Dulal" which was set by myself in there and I think most of the participants on these event know that I was using that camera. Did you fined any matched photographs with other and did any other photographers claimed them as their contributions? What reason drags you here to looks for copyright after one years of upload? -- Nirmal Dulal (talk) 04:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Nirmal Dulal, Thank you for the ping. I understand your concern. Let me explain, even if the pictures were taken with your camera, but you're not the photographer or copyright holder. Sorry, I may have mistaken but some of them are not your own work. As you told, no i didn't find any matched photographs with other and also any other photographers didn't claim them as their contributions but see COM:CARES: Commons cares about copyright even when a copyright owner does not. I noticed that you, the uploader is the subject of various picture and it doesn't look like selfie. I assume, you haven't clicked those photographs, and metadata either explain someone else as copyright holder. Please send permission via COM:OTRS. Being an image reviewer here on commons, my rights and duties drags me to check the files if it's okay for commons or not. I actively tagged dozens of files for deletion everyday. Xtools counted that i have over 4000 deleted edits. Feel free to ping me if you are still unclear. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 06:52, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep The author is trusted and confirmed himself that he set the author name Babin in his camera (Maybe he loves his nephew). The above nominated images contains proper EXIF data and falls under the common scope. I saw him doing photography in many regional and international Wikimedia events, and I confirmed that he clicked the photos of WMCON in Berlin himself and very likely to be photographed the rest of the events. Thanks--Biplab Anand (Talk) 04:51, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Some images now have OTRS permission, others are still pending. --Krd 12:04, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Krd, as per my conversation with copyright holder:Babin, he also sent permission to those images where I'm subject in photographs. Please review the permission clearly. Thanks and regards. - Nirmal Dulal (talk) 16:04, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Making things simpler.  I withdraw my nomination. I apology for inconvenience. Let's keep these photographs. As it is from Wikimedia events, obviously free files. We can change the attributions to "Wikimedians of Nepal User Group" and "Wikimedia Conference" or "Babin Dulal" as it fits. Also, delete File:Metropolitan Police Office of Nepal.jpg: No FOP in Nepal and © Soul-bridge. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 18:36, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Johan, I think there is some misunderstanding. As I know, the author and copyright holder: Babin(as per meta data and nominator) sent COM:OTRS permission to all those images mentioned above but you deleted only those picture where I am subject in photographs (as per nominator). Is that mean I can't upload my images even there is permission from author and copyright holder? Can you please review the OTRS Ticket:2019081710004861 properly. thanks and regards. - Nirmal Dulal (talk) 04:14, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Nirmal Dulal: Sorry for the inconvenience. Restoring the files and closing the discussion ASAP. Thank you for your patience. Kind regards, — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 06:54, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per Ticket:2019081710004861 and above discussion. — Tulsi Bhagat (contribs | talk) 07:19, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file is redundant as it's almost the same of the flag of Iran except for white marks at the four corners (which seem unintentional). The only page that it's used is the user page of "Erfantenhome" (who also uploaded the file) on the Persian Wikipedia. The file is titled "Flag of my country.png" (the country being Iran) and is used on the user page with the English words "I love my country" displayed below it (which obviously shows the intent of the file but not why the actual one wasn't used). Please delete it, replace the file with Flag of Iran.svg on the user page and add a capital "I" in the message (I tried doing the last two but the edit wouldn't save). Thanks in advance. 51.37.96.180 14:48, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --4nn1l2 (talk) 15:00, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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


Copyright violation Stalin990 (talk) 21:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Deleted by Didym. --Gbawden (talk) 10:40, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright violation Laggarto (talk) 19:34, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Laggarto (talk) 14:16, 15 August 2019 (UTC) its an original and recent image of the elected president of Guatemala. Original Content[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 10:44, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:TOYS. Yuraily Lic (talk) 12:15, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:03, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted advertisement. Yuraily Lic (talk) 12:21, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a advertisement. But it's not a good photo. It's OK to delete it.--HQA02330 (talk) 20:51, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted DW; uploader consent to deletion. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:02, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted character. Yuraily Lic (talk) 12:29, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:01, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

confusing personal photo of no value. Viztor (talk) 12:38, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Close as Kept; free licensed and no consensus to delete. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:00, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted advertisements. Yuraily Lic (talk) 23:47, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think this photo is just a view of the station and there is no fear of copyright infringement.--Tokyodesert (talk) 13:07, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep de minimis
Yet another bad nomination from Yuraily Lic: see User problems §Yuraily Lic. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:14, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The caption of this file 駅の電飾看板広告 means signboard advertisements in station. The main subject of this photo is advertisements. --Yuraily Lic (talk) 13:27, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Does it mean that it was determined by the caption of the file? The copyright infringement does not depend on what kind of caption the file is given.--Tokyodesert (talk) 11:09, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep--Tokyodesert (talk) 11:09, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Closed as Kept per comments. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:05, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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


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

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

Hi,

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks for your help,

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

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



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

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

No FOP in the UAE

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


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

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

No COM:FOP in the UAE.

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

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

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

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

No FOP in the UAE

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


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

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

No COM:FOP in the UAE for buildings.

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


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

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

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

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

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


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

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

Copyrighted building in UAE which has no freedom of panorama.

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


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

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

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

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


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

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

Building under copyright, no Freedom of Panorama.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates!

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


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

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

No freedom of panorama in the UAE

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


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

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

no FoP in the UAE

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


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

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

No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates!

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

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

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

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

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

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

No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates!

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


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

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

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

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


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

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

No FOP in UAE

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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


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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Works by Jean Dubuffet who died in 1985, works protected until 1 Jan 2056 (minimum)

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 05:22, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Andy Dingley: Most of the files nom-ed are works that are either in US or France which both do not have any FOP for sculptures. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 06:57, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I see you've already removed one (in Switzerland). As noted already, scatter-gun deletion requests are a big time-sink for other editors. Are they expected to check that every deletion was in a country (and yes, USA and France are restrictive, see COM:FoP) where the DR is valid? The onus should be firmly on the nominator to check that their requests are correct beforehand. Andy Dingley (talk) 07:04, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note that File:L'arbre biplan.JPG is in Portugal, where FoP would apply. Andy Dingley (talk) 07:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Andy Dingley: removed that too. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 07:31, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DELETED: but two sculptures in countries with freedom of panorama (Portugal and Switzerland) are  kept. Taivo (talk) 19:46, 6 October 2019 (UTC)}}[reply]

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

Likely the same file as that of the deleted one. Repeat upload of unfree sculpture in a country that does not have commercial FOP.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:01, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9   01:11, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP fore sculptures in the USA

— Racconish💬 14:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Racconish as for File:Dubuffet Group of Four Trees 1972 NYC.jpg, it is a photograph of an outdoor sculpture installed in a public location in New York before 1977 which means it should be considered in public domain per Commons:Public art and copyrights in the US, specifically "Publication requires placing the statue in a public location where people can make copies." Ppt91 (talk) 17:34, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
is Ppt91 (talk) 17:34, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fyi, I changed the notice in the file to reflect the public domain per what I stated above. Thanks. Ppt91 (talk) 17:35, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 10:13, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

bad quality ZellmerLP (talk) 13:08, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am the original uploader, and I don't oppose deletion. Indeed, I intended to upload the file to Beta Commons for testing purposes, and only uploaded it here in error.
That said, I disagree that the file is of bad quality; it's an official logo, straight from https://www.debian.org/logos/. A better case could be made that it's redundant with other images of the same logo already on Commons.
In any case, whatever the site admins choose to do with this is fine with me.
--MHolloway (WMF) (talk) 15:34, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted unused; uploader does not contest deletion. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:50, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

bitmap in pdf extracted to File:Jose Silveira Machado 1995.jpg Sebastian Wallroth (talk) 05:54, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Per Ras67. --Gbawden (talk) 09:09, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by AltaïrThePathfinder (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Louis de Verdal is born in 1948. No OTRS.

Chassipress (talk) 16:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Hello, these pictures are royalty free and, if necessary, I can produce a certificate from the artist himself. --AltaïrThePathfinder (talk) 23:31, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Now has OTRS. --Gbawden (talk) 09:08, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FoP in Japan. The tengu statue in Takao Station (Tokyo) was made in 1978. See https://hachioji.keizai.biz/headline/1011/

Yuraily Lic (talk) 08:46, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 01:14, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FoP for graphic works in the United Kingdom A1Cafel (talk) 09:33, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 01:15, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted advertisement. Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:33, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 01:17, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:PACKAGING. Yuraily Lic (talk) 13:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 01:19, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Worse version of Alexandrovsky sad SPb 1907.jpg. Красный wanna talk? 10:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 14:24, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:PACKAGING. Yuraily Lic (talk) 14:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep COM:TOO Andy Dingley (talk) 18:59, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --A.Savin 14:25, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:PACKAGING. Yuraily Lic (talk) 14:52, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep COM:TOO Andy Dingley (talk) 18:59, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete the fruits and the patterns around the mouth and neck are creative enough.--Roy17 (talk) 17:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion, COM:De minimis. --A.Savin 14:26, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Replaced with a SVG file. Árna (talk) 16:38, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 14:27, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Replaced with a SVG file. Árna (talk) 16:41, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 14:27, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This photo violates the laws of Ukraine 95.67.47.58 20:57, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DR doesn't have valid reason --Butko (talk) 07:29, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep If you, 95.67.47.58, claim that "This photo violates the laws of Ukraine", please quote what law\s and what articles of said law\s, or your claims are nothing but empty words. Even if this photo "violates the laws of Ukraine", this is not a reason to delete photo, as this photo shows 2 T-64BV, an ex-soviet, and ukrainian or russian main battle tank in use of the military of the separatist Donetsk People's Republic. Tm (talk) 21:37, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --A.Savin 14:29, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Video is not licensed under Creative Commons. Viewing the code of the archive link does not offer it either. ƏXPLICIT 11:52, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. howcheng {chat} 18:56, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was previously nominated for deletion on scope-related grounds, and I kept the file on that DR. In looking into Bangladeshi FOP, however, it appears that 2D works are not likely covered. Section 36(c) appears to refer to works of artistic craftsmanship, and maps are specifically enumerated in section 36(a) which does not seem to be covered by FOP. See VPC discussion with Carl. Storkk (talk) 08:40, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   02:30, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Patrick Rogel as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://www.luxsure.fr/2018/05/04/prix-de-la-closerie-des-lilas-attribue-a-odile-doultremont-pour-les-deraisons/. Converting to regular DR per claim on talk page. @Alie75: pour qu'on puisse verifier la permission, il faudra que Jean Picot nous contacte en suivant les instructions sur COM:OTRS. Merci. Storkk (talk) 17:16, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Très bien, je vais contacter le photographe et je ferai les démarches précisées. Merci. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alie75 (talk • contribs) 17:21, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete No evidence of permission after 3 months. Regards, --Ganímedes (talk) 00:54, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   02:31, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This photo is taken in private premises without the right to be taken and published. I am the rughtful owner of the company Biuro Monrol (talk) 20:18, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Not freedom of panorama in Poland (exterior only). Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 00:59, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   02:32, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This photo is taken in private premises without the right to be taken and published. I am the rughtful owner of the company Biuro Monrol (talk) 20:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image seems to be capture in the street, and here Freedom of panorama applies. So  Keep. Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 01:01, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: taken from public street, see Google Streetview. P 1 9 9   02:36, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This photo is taken in private premises without the right to be taken and published. I am the rughtful owner of the company Biuro Monrol (talk) 20:20, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: taken from public street. P 1 9 9   02:41, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This photo is taken in private premises without the right to be taken and published. I am the rughtful owner of the company Biuro Monrol (talk) 20:19, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: taken from public street. P 1 9 9   02:37, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

This photo is taken in private premises without the right to be taken and published. I am the rughtful owner of the company Biuro Monrol (talk) 20:21, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: taken from public street, see Google Streetview. P 1 9 9   02:41, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted posters. Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:29, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. See COM:DM Japan. The focus is in the posters. --Regasterios (talk) 12:42, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Created in 1953 - less than 70 years ago. Copyright. 217.108.130.1 13:07, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Je regrette cette demande cette demande de suppression faite anonymement par un utilisateur non enregistré. Je ne comprends pas cette interdiction de photographier cet édifice public, principale église de la ville, même si elle a été construite en 1953. Cordialement --Broenberr (talk) 13:37, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Idem Commons:Deletion requests/File:Eglise Saint Louis ~Brest (4).jpg : c'est bien parce qu'elle a été construite dans la seconde partie du XXe siècle que cette église, et les photographies la représentant, ne sont pas libres de droits. Sammyday (talk) 09:41, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. COM:FOP France. --Regasterios (talk) 12:57, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Created in 1953 - less than 70 years ago. Copyright. 217.108.130.1 13:08, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Je regrette cette demande cette demande de suppression faite anonymement par un utilisateur non enregistré. Je ne comprends pas cette interdiction de photographier cet édifice public, principale église de la ville, même si elle a été construite en 1953. Cordialement --Broenberr (talk) 13:38, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Idem Commons:Deletion requests/File:Eglise Saint Louis ~Brest (4).jpg : c'est bien parce qu'elle a été construite dans la seconde partie du XXe siècle que cette église, et les photographies la représentant, ne sont pas libres de droits. Sammyday (talk) 09:41, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. COM:FOP France. --Regasterios (talk) 12:58, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Created in 1953 - less than 70 years ago. Copyright. 217.108.130.1 13:08, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Je regrette cette demande cette demande de suppression faite anonymement par un utilisateur non enregistré. Je ne comprends pas cette interdiction de photographier cet édifice public, principale église de la ville, même si elle a été construite en 1953. Cordialement --Broenberr (talk) 13:39, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Idem Commons:Deletion requests/File:Eglise Saint Louis ~Brest (4).jpg : c'est bien parce qu'elle a été construite dans la seconde partie du XXe siècle que cette église, et les photographies la représentant, ne sont pas libres de droits. Sammyday (talk) 09:41, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. COM:FOP France. --Regasterios (talk) 12:58, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Created in 1953 - less than 70 years ago. Copyright. 217.108.130.1 13:10, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Je regrette cette demande cette demande de suppression faite anonymement par un utilisateur non enregistré. Je ne comprends pas cette interdiction de photographier cet édifice public, principale église de la ville, même si elle a été construite en 1953. Cordialement --Broenberr (talk) 13:36, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
C'est moi qui ait fait ces demandes sous IP. Il n'y a aucune interdiction de photographier cet édifice public. Par contre, pour pouvoir le mettre sur Commons, il vous faut prouver que vous avez l'autorisation des ayants-droit de cette oeuvre, construite entre 1953 et 1958 par plusieurs architectes. C'est ce qu'on appelle une image non libre de droits. Sammyday (talk) 09:39, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. COM:FOP France. --Regasterios (talk) 12:58, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Created in 1953 - less than 70 years ago. Copyright. 217.108.130.1 13:10, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Je regrette cette demande cette demande de suppression faite anonymement par un utilisateur non enregistré. Je ne comprends pas cette interdiction de photographier cet édifice public, principale église de la ville, même si elle a été construite en 1953. Cordialement --Broenberr (talk) 13:40, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. COM:FOP France. --Regasterios (talk) 12:59, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:PACKAGING. Yuraily Lic (talk) 14:43, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. — Racconish💬 12:01, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

No COM:FOP in the UAE.

russavia (talk) 19:01, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

These images include architectural works in the UAE, where there is no freedom of panorama.

 Keep I think de minimis applies in this case. It's a photo of security at the hotel, but neither the hotel or even the hotel security checkpoint architecture are prominent. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:55, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Previous discussion is here. I think, however, a mistake was made in that discussion. At very least, the image should be cropped to remove the hotel. That said, I dont' see why the security checkpoint would not also be subject to copyright. It's clearly a unique piece of architecture. The fact that it's not a famous hotel doesn't make it less copyrightable. - Themightyquill (talk) 07:00, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I understand. The wikipedia article at en:Madinat Jumeirah doesn't give a date for its construction. Is it old enough to be in the public domain somehow? Just because it's not the Burj Al Arab doesn't mean it's not copyrighted. - Themightyquill (talk) 16:25, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Do buildings in Madinat Jumeirah have a copyright? I don't see there anything over the en:Threshold of originality. Poco2 16:38, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This may well qualify as Freedom of Panorama, since it's a model in Germany. Please see discussion below before taking action. - Themightyquill (talk) 16:25, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Guanaco (talk) 07:35, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • While I'm here I'm going to make some specific comments on the individual images:
  • File:Burj Al Arab from a beach in Dubai.jpg – I stand by my position in the original DR and the eventual decision. It's a photograph of the beach and objects on it, not of the Burj Al Arab which in incidentally in the background. In fact, my impression is that I just pointed the camera in a random direction and fired but I liked the result so I uploaded it to Commons. The Burj Al Arab could be made invisible and you'd still have a useful image, which is proof enough of de minimis in my view.
Would you consider a) cropping to just the left hand side of the photo? b) renaming it and moving it to a different category? - Themightyquill (talk) 19:56, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that sounds reasonable to me, but the file should be renamed and moved to a different category. - Themightyquill (talk) 19:56, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think they are definitely good shots of the marina and coast line, but I think the buildings on the right are more than questionable. Luckily, they could easily be cropped out and good images of the coastline and marina would remain. - Themightyquill (talk) 19:56, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Same as above. The Burj Al Arab is less prominent, but so is the marina. The buildings on the right are, as a result, more prominent. - Themightyquill (talk) 19:56, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to assume good faith in your comments, despite the fact that I only added a car category this week. As I mentioned above, however, there is little architecture visible, so I see no reason to delete it. -Themightyquill (talk) 19:56, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Entrance to the Burj Al Arab.jpg – This is a more complicated one but I stand-by my comments in the recent DR and the eventual result. The Burj Al Arab is easily de minimis when one applies the Lovre standard, which is based on actual case law and is endorsed by policy. I accept that one can reasonably argue that this standard is too lenient though policy really needs to be changed, or at least clarified, if that is going to fly in my view. There is no known case law in the UAE on where to draw the line with de minimis so using the French standard as a guide seems reasonable. The security checkpoint (Welcome Centre), along with the entrance generally, was the intended subject and I accept this is not de minimis. However, I don't believe it meets the threshold of originality to attract copyright protection. Again, this is a matter of opinion, especially as there's no UAE case law to go on, though past precedent does hold that photos of small utilitarian buildings of this nature are generally kept. CT Cooper · talk 17:58, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have trouble accepting dm here. The image is called "View on the hotel of Burj Al Arab". The image description is "View on the hotel of Burj Al Arab" and it's only in one category, Category:Burj Al Arab. If the hotel is not the focus of the photo, what exactly is it a picture of? If it's not a photo of the hotel, it's likely out of scope. Themightyquill (talk) 12:58, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would also prefere de minimis, similar to the Eifeltower at night case (check de:Eiffelturm#Beleuchtung_und_Lichtkunst. And the interiors are not copyrighted cause of TOO or design protection.--~~

Burj Al Arab is a copyrighted building in a country without Freedom of Panorama. If you'd like to claim that one of these images is simply a photo of the city's general skyline and that Burj Al Arab is therefore de minimis, the photo should probably not be named "Burj Al Arab" or be in Category:Burj Al Arab (both of which suggest it's the focus of the image).

[Sorry for the double nomination here. I didn't realize these were already under discussion. I've removed duplicated nominations.]

Themightyquill (talk) 12:52, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We should ask Themightyquill, the mightyest admin in Commons to delete this chapter. (Including my guts to joke around with an admin... :-) --E4024 (talk) 13:04, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If there's a problem with the image title or image description then they should be re-named, not deleted. And yet again we have an image of a model in Germany (and is clearly tagged as such) being nominated for deletion on grounds of "No FOP in the UAE". Is it too much to ask for people to bother checking the contents of the files and their copyright information before nominating? This "It has the Burj Al Arab in the title and/or the description - DELETE!" approach is not helpful at all, not to mention a slap in the face for those who contribute content to Commons. I'm not impressed at all. CT Cooper · talk 14:28, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, I agree, if it's just a problem with an image title or description, they should be renamed (and moved out of this category) not deleted. That was my point. Which cases that applies to should be decided here.
It's no more a slap in the face than the enormous number of people who think they are being helpful by uploading images of the building (despite the fact that the category has a template clearly indicating that it's copyrighted) slapping those to try to manage commons files. I'm sorry for that mistake (as well) but please don't take it personally. ::That said, out of curiosity - what exactly are the legalities of minimundus created a model of a copyrighted building. If I create a sculpture of Mickey Mouse and mount it permanently in Germany, can I take a picture of it and upload it to commons? Or does minimundus request permission to create its models? - Themightyquill (talk) 16:04, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
All of my uploads are compliant with policy as I understood at the time of upload (which was over six years ago) and as of right now. Photographs that I took in the UAE which depicted copyright architectural work in which COM:DM and other exceptions didn't apply were not uploaded, though this is often a judgement call in which two or more reasonable people can disagree on. If I knew what I knew now back then and still decided to go ahead and upload them, I would have probably titled some of them and described them differently and maybe created a "Burj Al Arab (incidental)" or similar category which I recall seeing done with other things elsewhere. However, almost all of my uploads in these two nominations have been subject to previous DRs, one of which was only three months ago (see my earlier comments). I think anyone in my position would have been annoyed to see their upload just casually re-nominated for deletion (twice) only a short time after a lengthy DR which ended in keep. However, I appreciate your apology.
I understand that people can get frustrated when they clean out a category of copyright violating images only for them to be filled-up again shortly afterwards, having been in that position myself multiple times while I was active here. Putting aside that much of the blame for this should go to systemic issues with Commons, many contributors try to do the right thing and it is not fair on them to just declare open season on all images in a category, especially as anyone can add or remove an image from a category. At the very minimum, people nominating images for deletion should be checking that the uploads are not already subject to a DR, haven't been subject to one recently and the contents of the images justify the nominated reasons for deletion. I accept that there are some situations when an image can/should be re-nominated for deletion but there ought to be some kind of explanation on why the nominator thinks the original decision should be put aside, especially if it was made recently, and mass DRs are not well suited for such images.
On the model of the Burj Al Arab, well one thing is very clear – "No FoP in the UAE" is not goods grounds on its own to delete it as it's not in the UAE, it's in Germany. Cross-border copyright is very complicated and far from settled, and freedom of panorama is no exception, but current practice is to use the most lenient standard. Given that Germany has freedom of panorama for both architecture and sculptures, presuming it's on permanent display and was photographed from a public place (the rules for this under German law are quite complicated), then it should be okay. CT Cooper · talk 18:38, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your thoughts, CT Cooper, and for your contributions to commons. I didn't realize until after my mistake that Visual File Change does subtly notify users that an image is already under discussion. I won't make the same mistake again. If there are filename changes you think might apply, just let me know and I'd be happy to rename them. It might be worth moving the minimundus image something like Category:Models of the Burj Al Arab or Category:Burj Al Arab (Minimundus Bodensee‎) to separate it from the other images. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:51, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: the files that were dm, deleted the others. NB: A cityscape/skyline is by definition dm. Ruthven (msg) 09:23, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FoP in the UAE

Saqib (talk) 13:10, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@A.Savin: I had no idea if these were previously AfD'ed and kept. I withdraw my nom. Apologies. --Saqib (talk) 14:05, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Btw I believe some of them should be deleted such as File:Burj al Arab - Mina a'salam - panoramio.jpg, File:Dubai - United Arab Emirates - panoramio (14).jpg, File:Dubai - United Arab Emirates - panoramio (14).jpg, File:Gfhec 2006 - panoramio.jpg, File:Hollow concrete chamfered cubes texture (523157633).jpg, File:Umm Suqeim 3 - Dubai - United Arab Emirates - panoramio (3).jpg, File:Umm Suqeim beach, Jumeira 3 - Dubai - United Arab Emirates - panoramio.jpg. These files were never nom for deletion before. --Saqib (talk) 14:09, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Saqib: Can you then reduce the above list to the files you mentioned, and remove the RfD tag from the other ones, so we can let the RfD run? --A.Savin 14:19, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --Saqib (talk) 14:26, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks.  Delete all then. --A.Savin 14:29, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Saqib: Can you remove the RfD tag from the kept files? --A.Savin 16:14, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 17:07, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP in UAE

(Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 05:14, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some files doesn't necessarily depict Burj Al Arab as the main subject but FOP still applies on other skyscrapers. (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 05:16, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: On File:Dubai Skyline on 10 January 2008.jpg: this was included in the Section 2 of this DR req, yet it was kept because of DM. Based on my observation of the picture this qualifies DM since it doesn't mainly depict the copyrighted works (or assumed to be copyrighted works), and are considered accessory to this picture (since a good picture of Dubai's skyline cannot be achieved without DM inclusion of such structures as Burj Khalifa or Burj al-Arab). Cropping might constitute a breach of DM, yet I would want to let other, more experienced contributors or admins to decide on this matter. (IMO, I think it needs to be pulled out of Category:Burj Al Arab, and add De Minimis Tag to let others remind that this mustn't be cropped).JWilz12345 (talk) 03:35, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Kept per dm except 1 (and consistency with previous closures). — Racconish💬 13:38, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Elegant interior architecture/designs. No freedom of panorama in UAE, and COM:OTRS permission from architect Tom Wright and involved interior designers is required. Unless, have FOP introduced in the country.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:15, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Same as above nominations: no FOP in UAE and violation of architect Tom Wright's copyright in using CC/PD licensing. Also, while de minimis may be used as a defense, the building is an essential element in each of these images, and cropping will render all of them useless.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:19, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep File:The Burj Al Arab.jpg as I have cropped and remove the tower. --A1Cafel (talk) 14:16, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@A1Cafel: by cropping it I doubt it is usable as it became redundant to existing imags at Category:Dubai. Its COM:EDUSE seems to have been diminished after removal of the building. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:41, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I reviewed the cropped File:The Burj Al Arab.jpg again. I'm convinced it must be deleted now as out of COM:SCOPE. A dull street angle (not a true street scene) in which the only interesting object is a banner or ad in the distance, which may violate COM:DW. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:48, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination. Al Arab.jpg is borderline post crop but not really in scope. --Geni (talk) 05:05, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. No FoP in Japan. Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:13, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


この度、私の作品が削除審議との事で、一言申し上げます。
この作品は日本国内の公共的な港湾施設の一角で、「 この施設の安全性をアピールしたいので、不特定多数の人々の目に留まるように 」 と言う設置者の意向でわざわざ公道に沿った場所に設置されおり、これを踏まえて撮影しました。
つまり 「 被写体が恒常的に公共の場所に置かれている 」 に該当する、「 Freedom of panorama 」 であると理解して、作品ページにも関連するタグを表示しておりますので、宜しくお願いいたします。
なお、勝手ながら私は自身のページにも記しています様に、日本語以外は一切理解できませんし、また翻訳ソフトを使ってみましたがこれも殆ど理解不能の結果だらけになりますので、それらの点を何卒、ご理解をお願い申し上げます。--Gazouya-japan (talk) 22:23, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. — Racconish💬 13:34, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

COM:DW. Copyrighted map. Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:21, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


この度、私の作品が削除審議との事で、一言申し上げます。
この作品は日本国内の公共的な港湾施設の一角で、「 この施設をアピールしたいので、不特定多数の人々の目に留まるように 」 と言う設置者の意向でわざわざ公道に沿った場所に設置されおり、これを踏まえて撮影しました。
つまり 「 被写体が恒常的に公共の場所に置かれている 」 に該当する、「 Freedom of panorama 」 であると理解して、作品ページにも関連するタグを表示しておりますので、宜しくお願いいたします。
なお、勝手ながら私は自身のページにも記しています様に、日本語以外は一切理解できませんし、また翻訳ソフトを使ってみましたがこれも殆ど理解不能の結果だらけになりますので、それらの点を何卒、ご理解をお願い申し上げます。--Gazouya-japan (talk) 22:19, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Non-artistic work, schematic map. --Regasterios (talk) 12:33, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. — Racconish💬 13:34, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anonyme_ou_Collectif_-_Voyages_imaginaires,_songes,_visions_et_romans_cabalistiques,_tome_17.djvu George2etexte (talk) 10:13, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: in use. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 19:48, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]


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

Duplicate of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Anonyme_ou_Collectif_-_Voyages_imaginaires,_songes,_visions_et_romans_cabalistiques,_tome_18.djvu George2etexte (talk) 10:14, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: in use. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 19:48, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]