Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2019/12/06
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.png){kind=link}
.gif){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_ballot.jpg){kind=link}
![148 File:"Fridtjof Nansen" - Genoa, 1989 01.jpg](#File:"Fridtjof_Nansen"_-_Genoa,_1989_01.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Childish junk drawn in MS Paint, is not and should not be used in any article Reywas92 (talk) 04:07, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted Possible joke/troll image; certainly of no in-scope usefulness. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 12:55, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
the watermarks strongly suggest this si the work of a professional photographer and not the uploader's own work. Beeblebrox (talk) 08:24, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Speedy per #F10. ~riley (talk) 08:43, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
not a free image, not declared free by source Flix11 (talk) 05:18, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio at 08:00, 6 Dezember 2019 UTC: Copyright violation: (C) Fakta Tokoh --Krdbot 13:57, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Foot2.JPG
Files uploaded by Alemseged Sisay (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE.
- File:LITERARY GREETING IN THE SOUL.jpg
- File:HONORED IN LITERATURE.jpg
- File:Alemseged Sisay Woldemariam Award of World Icon of Literature From National Academy Of Arts and Culture.jpg
- File:MY AWA.jpg
- File:Award for Literature.jpg
Patrick Rogel (talk) 10:45, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by Fitindia before 7 days. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 12:08, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Alemseged Sisay (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text documents of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.
- File:New World Story Makers in English Poetry (1).pdf
- File:New World Story Makers in English Poetry Writting of Gammo Style.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:23, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 09:13, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
Ich halte die Rechte an diesem Foto. Yasemin Yazan (talk) 11:04, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Und wer ist der Urheber/Fotograf? --Túrelio (talk) 11:08, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by ~riley. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 12:09, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Ich halte die Rechte an diesem Foto Yasemin Yazan (talk) 11:05, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by ~riley. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 12:09, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Unlikely own work by uploader, considering upload-history and watermarks (right upper and lower corner). -- Túrelio (talk) 14:52, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Túrelio I sent this to {{Speedy}} as it is a crop of https://www.instagram.com/p/B5tDkTDFDe8/. Chico Venancio (talk) 15:05, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Ok. Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 15:06, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by Túrelio. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 12:09, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Duplicate of [1] Pbrks (talk) 17:03, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
![[1]](http://www.efimeridakassandra.gr/media/k2/items/cache/7ced67c0d648122bcae10129de981341_M.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Deleted by ~riley. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 12:10, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Because it is Logo Jistrum (talk) 19:46, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Delete Clear copyvio, the logo is far above the TOO. Fma12 (talk) 10:32, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Speedy as above. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 12:11, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bhima wakale (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE.
- File:Bkwakale.jpg
- File:Bhima Wa.jpg
- File:Wakale.png
- File:Wakale.jpg
- File:Bhimaraje.jpg
- File:Bhma dada.jpg
- File:Bhima bhau.jpg
- File:Wakale patil.jpg
- File:Bhima.jpg
- File:Frien.jpg
- File:Charman.jpg
- File:DW (16).jpg
- File:IdB-jLKL 400x400.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:48, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by Fitindia before 7 days. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 12:10, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by El Kharisma Kasilembo (talk · contribs)
[edit]Dubious claim of own work. Files should be sourced and re-licensed if applicable.
- File:FC MK.jpg
- File:Fecofa.png.jpg
- File:AS Dragons.jpg
- File:US Tshinkunku.jpg
- File:SC Cilu.jpg
- File:AS Kabasha.jpg
- File:Logo Bantous.jpg
大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 08:38, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Obvious copyvios, also out of scope because of the ridiculously low resolution. De728631 (talk) 19:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 13:51, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by El Kharisma Kasilembo (talk · contribs)
[edit]Low-re images, unlikely to be own works.
Patrick Rogel (talk) 23:08, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by Fitindia. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 12:11, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE.
Patrick Rogel (talk) 23:15, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by Fitindia. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 12:12, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Personal file EninE (talk) 02:56, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by ~riley. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 12:12, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by ایرانم آرزوست (talk · contribs)
[edit]xwiki vanity spam, unlikely to be own work and uploaded by a serial copyright violator and spammer.
Praxidicae (talk) 16:08, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, grabbed from instagram. --Achim (talk) 12:59, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused personal logo, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:25, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Alaa :)..! 18:07, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
personal photograph that I wish to have deleted Moeed Raza (talk) 20:38, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Alaa :)..! 18:06, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Per code in EXIF data likely taken from Instagram or Facebook. -- Túrelio (talk) 13:57, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hanooz 19:02, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Per code in EXIF data likely taken from Instagram or Facebook. -- Túrelio (talk) 13:57, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hanooz 19:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Per code in EXIF data likely taken from Instagram or Facebook. -- Túrelio (talk) 13:57, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hanooz 19:05, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
unused file, private image of unknown notability Cjp24 (talk) 02:22, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 01:34, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
Looks like a screenshot, no exif, unlikely to be own work. PCP Gbawden (talk) 08:47, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 01:35, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
Appears to be taken from https://www.pexels.com/photo/2166979/, and Pexels photos uploaded after June 2018 are incompatible with Commons Ytoyoda (talk) 13:18, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 01:36, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
Undescribed image with educative value. Richard Avery (talk) 14:13, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. unclear subject, not usable. --Gestumblindi (talk) 01:37, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
Derivative work of sculpture Askel ("Step) by finnish sculptor Hannu Siren, born 1953. Not in PD, no FOP for sculptures in Finland. Htm (talk) 12:34, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Delete. --Abc10 (talk) 05:58, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 02:23, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
Minuscule; uncertain origin (appears to be from google street view, though not definitely so). MPF (talk) 18:10, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 02:22, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
No permission Tyseria (d) 19:21, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted by Racconish at 09:13, 14 Dezember 2019 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing (F1) --Krdbot 13:38, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Haratunder (talk · contribs)
[edit]Uploaded as "own work" by user blocked at en.wp for disruption and with a long history of copyvio here. No indication that these are genuine. No details of provenance or actual source beyond a bare claim of "own work"
Begoon 04:51, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:07, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
There is no freedom of panorama in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the photo violates sculptor's copyright. Taivo (talk) 12:45, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:08, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Andreamolino (talk · contribs)
[edit]None of these images appear to be selfies, as indicated by the "own work" release. Looking around online, a version of this image appears to have been used here as far back as 2012. Only one includes the original meta data. This image is dated 2004, as is this one. Others are dated on the exact date of upload. It is technically possible that this person has a nuanced understanding of copyright, and they have meticulously set up timed camera shots spanning 15 years so that they can upload these images to Commons as own work. But it seems all together more likely that they confuse subject with creator/owner, and merely pulled images from hither and yon and uploaded them without regard for source or copyright.
- File:Andrea Molino - Conductor 1.png
- File:Andrea Molino - Conductor 2.jpg
- File:Andrea Molino - Composer 1.jpg
- File:Andrea Molino - Composer 2.png
GMGtalk 13:24, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- It's too bad about the pictures, but I'll have to support this deletion request, considering that I started the discussion. :-) --217.239.10.88 14:17, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:50, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Small photo without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. I suspect not own work, but copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 13:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
It's not clear exactly what this is supposed to be, but appears to be characters from a video series of unknown notability or copyright status. Not clear that this woudl be within COM:SCOPE even if it were properly licensed, which is not apparent. GMGtalk 13:49, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Same problem with: File:Finzo y Funzo (1080p).png . --Túrelio (talk) 15:18, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:02, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Shailendrakrish (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram. Duplicate. Should be in SVG if useful.
- File:Shailendra chart 9.0-Layout.pdf
- File:Shailendra chart 9.0-Layout 1.jpg
- File:Final chart 5.0-Layout4-page-001.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:46, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 10:48, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Shailendrakrish (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagrams of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:04, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Josevallejos1957 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text documents of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:05, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused presentation of questionable notability. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:11, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jose Angel Tabares (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of project scope
- File:Ylioppilas.jpg
- File:Amanda-uimapuku.jpg
- File:Triptico miedo, morir o vivir.jpg
- File:Frendly forever.jpg
- File:Bella turkkilainen.jpg
- File:® Jose Tabares, Photographer Valokuvaaja Jose Tabares.jpg
- File:Musculo ® Jose Tabares, Photographer.jpg
- File:Salida del sol.jpg
- File:Madogna en el mar.jpg
ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 16:15, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:09, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Historical photo and book. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:16, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:09, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:26, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
- File:محب Moheb.jpg
- File:محب moheb.jpg
- File:محب مطرب.jpg
- File:محب MOHEB.jpg
- File:نص حاله للفنان محب.jpg
- File:ابراهيم محب.jpg
- File:الفنان ابراهيم محب.jpg
- File:المطرب محب.jpg
- File:ابراهيم محب فنان مطرب مصري.jpg
- File:ابراهيم محب IBRAHIM MOHEB.jpg
- File:محب.jpg
- File:ابراهيم محب .jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:44, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. - FitIndia Talk Mail 18:59, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:29, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:52, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
potentially out of scope.
- File:وليد جبر بفلم نهاية العالم و دفاع الأفعى الفرعونيه.jpg
- File:وليد جبر في صالة ناديه المركز الرياضي العالمي.jpg
- File:صوره ل وليد جبر.jpg
Roy17 (talk) 13:42, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 11:14, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
Personal photo for non-Wikimedian. Unused = Out of scope
- File:صوره ل وليد جبر بمسلسل للتلفزيون الحكومي المصري الفتره العمريه المراهقه.jpg
- File:صوره ل وليد جبر و رمز حركة يده المشهور.jpg
- File:صوره ل وليد جبر من فلم نهاية العالم و دفاع الأفعى الفرعونيه.jpg
- File:وليد جبر في ناديه المركز الرياضي العالمي.jpg
- File:صوره ل وليد جبر مبتكر برنامج حورس الغذائي.jpg
- File:صوره ل وليد جبر يتدرب الكونغ فو و هو طفل.jpg
- File:وليد جبر.jpg
--Alaa :)..! 17:33, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: personal unused files. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:52, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused presentation slide with little educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:12, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:09, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused presentation slide with little context and educational value, out of scope.| P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:09, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused graphic with little context and educational value, out of scope.| P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:21, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:09, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused graphic with little context and educational value, out of scope.| P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:22, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:09, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused text table with little context or educational value, for article that was deleted on en.wp, out of scope. Also nominated:
- File:Figure 2 of the article napping.png
- File:Figure 3 of the article napping.png
- File:Figure 4 of the article napping.png
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:24, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused screenshot, no educational value, out of scope.| P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:25, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused personal doodle, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:52, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused graph, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:56, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused graph, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:58, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused graph, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:59, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused text-only table, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:00, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused text-only table, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:00, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused glyph, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:01, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused Explorer screenshot, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:02, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused screenshot, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:03, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused text-only table that should be in wikitable markup, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:04, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work, See the TinEye search. It is en:Alike (film). Estopedist1 (talk) 20:05, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused graphic, no context, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:11, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused personal doodle, no context, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:12, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused personal image, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:12, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Resolution Productions (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused logos, no educational value, out of scope.
- File:IQ Master Logo.jpg
- File:Social Media -1.png
- File:Social media 2.png
- File:Bottle Cap.png
- File:Res - logo- 15.png
- File:Resolution new Logo.png
P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:15, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused text-only doc, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:15, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused graph, little context or educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:16, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:55, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused logo, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:17, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:55, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused screenshot of WP infobox, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:19, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Historical book. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:24, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Hi EugeneZelenko, I am the uploader. I work for Wikimedia UK and this file was supplied to me by Conway Hall as part of a project we have undertaken with them. It's one of their 19th century pamphlets which they digitised as part of their Victorian Blogging digitisation project. You can see the pamphlet on their website under a CC0 license here. I have added this link to the file description now, so hopefully this will be enough for the file deletion to be closed. --Jwslubbock (talk) 11:01, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- I don't think that modern licenses are applicable to book, Please take a look on Commons:Copyright rules by territory for relevant country to find correct tag. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Hi EugeneZelenko, this book was published in 1869. Conway Hall digitised it, and made their digitised copy available on CC0. I'm not sure what the complication is here, but this book is clearly under an Open CC license, and so this deletion request should now be closed. --Jwslubbock (talk) 21:29, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Conway Hall is not book copyrights owner. See also w:en:Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp.. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:16, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- The book is out of copyright. It's from 1869. Do you understand how copyright works? The book is out of copyright, and the digital version is on CC0. I really do not see what is so hard to understand about this. --Jwslubbock (talk) 16:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- I have now updated the copyright tag to reflect that it is EU Public Domain. I hope that this satisfies you.--Jwslubbock (talk) 16:31, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Conway Hall is not book copyrights owner. See also w:en:Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp.. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:16, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Hi EugeneZelenko, this book was published in 1869. Conway Hall digitised it, and made their digitised copy available on CC0. I'm not sure what the complication is here, but this book is clearly under an Open CC license, and so this deletion request should now be closed. --Jwslubbock (talk) 21:29, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- I don't think that modern licenses are applicable to book, Please take a look on Commons:Copyright rules by territory for relevant country to find correct tag. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- "Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status" So this is making a point not suggesting deletion? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:15, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Keep The originally used licensing tag {{PD-self}} was not fitting because it assumes a still copyrighted work that is released into the public domain by the copyright holder (usually the creator). It's certainly not appropriate for tagging works that are assumed to be already out of copyright. It might be possible to use this, or a {{CC-zero}} release, in addition to marking the original work's public domain status if it is believed that the scan itself is copyrightable in the country where it was made, and the creators of the scan don't want to claim copyright on the scan. By the way, this pamphlet is actually not "under a CC0 license" at the source, as claimed in this discussion, but marked with the "Public Domain Mark 1.0" ("free of known copyright restrictions") which, unfortunately, isn't a way of marking public domain works that's usually accepted here, because the Commons community wants works to be marked with the actual reason for them being in the public domain, such as variants of {{PD-old-70}}. I would suggest to Jwslubbock to make sure that fitting license tags are used in such projects in the future. Meanwhile, the PD tag was changed to {{PD-old-70}}. I actually think that the publication date of 1869 would be enough to assume PD, but furthermore, it seems that the pamphlet's author George Bemis, given the subject matter, is this George Bemis, a lawyer who died in 1878. So it's certainly in the public domain in countries where 70 years p.m.a. applies, but as it is a US publication, it also needs a US tag. In doing this, I stuck to my identification of George Bemis, and used {{PD-old-auto-expired}}, which in my opinion is the best template for such cases, with Bemis' year of death 1878 in the deathyear parameter. I think this file is now perfectly fine to keep, but as I edited the licensing, I think I leave this request for another admin to close. Gestumblindi (talk) 02:02, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
Keep Clearly this needs to be closed now because it's an obvious keep. --Jwslubbock (talk) 13:26, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: License was fixed. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:01, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE (es:Enrique Limo Casals).
- File:Sin t tulo-73.jpg
- File:Sin t tulo-76.jpg
- File:Busto de Picasso.jpg
- File:Ginecologia.jpg
- File:Porches Almazora.jpg
- File:Sin t tulo-62.jpg
- File:Sin t tulo-12.jpg
- File:Sin t tulo-17.jpg
- File:FOTO E. LIMO.jpg
Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:21, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 10:46, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE (es:Enrique Limo Casals).
- File:FOTO E. LIMO CASALS.jpg
- File:Retrat de Mariló vestida de castellonera.jpg
- File:Porches de la Plaza Mayor Almassora.jpg
Patrick Rogel (talk) 23:44, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: for artwork also copyright issues. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:54, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Michaelishionwu (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE.
- File:The secret agent.png
- File:Instasize 190927123546 1569588288567.jpg
- File:Never be afraid of anything.png
- File:Instasize 191014170228.png
- File:Instasize 19110308.png
- File:Young makaveli.png
- File:Mickyve.jpg
Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:53, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:36, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
Copyright violation - Screenshot of Google Street View 64.223.249.222 13:40, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:15, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Copyright violation - Screenshot of Google Street View 64.223.249.222 13:41, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:15, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Copyright violation - Screenshot of Google Street View 64.223.249.222 13:44, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:15, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Copyright violation - Screenshot of Google Street View 64.223.249.222 13:45, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:15, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Copyright violation - Screenshot of Google Street View 64.223.249.222 13:47, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:14, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Copyright violation - Screenshot of Google Street View 64.223.249.222 13:49, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:13, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:14, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Copyright violation - Screenshot of Google Street View 64.223.249.222 13:51, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:13, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Copyright violation - Screenshot of Google Street View 64.223.249.222 13:51, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:13, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
created in error PeterWD (talk) 14:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:12, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
I want to open new profile ImRaj96 (talk) 16:18, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:11, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
I dont like it ImRaj96 (talk) 10:07, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:11, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:10, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
It is no reason for deletion
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:28, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:10, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Low quality 188.29.165.240 16:52, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Speedy keep- Delete Per nomination, clearly out of COM:SCOPE. --A.Savin 20:43, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- I just realized that this image is very small and blurry. This file is currently being on a talk page. Do we have any substitute image? If yes, I am willing to change my vote. Masum Reza📞 02:19, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- I am not sure if this file is in project scope. We do seem to have some similar low quality images at Category:Human_toes. So I am changing my vote to
Neutral. Masum Reza📞 02:23, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- I am not sure if this file is in project scope. We do seem to have some similar low quality images at Category:Human_toes. So I am changing my vote to
- I just realized that this image is very small and blurry. This file is currently being on a talk page. Do we have any substitute image? If yes, I am willing to change my vote. Masum Reza📞 02:19, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:09, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Uploader requested. Traffic signs in Canada are controlled by the provinces. Two provincial variations of this sign have been uploaded as File:Québec P-310.svg and File:Ontario Rc-4.svg. Fry1989 eh? 18:20, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:08, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Dubious "own work" source claim. Likely copyright violation. 73.67.171.38 18:57, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:07, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Because it is Random photo from internet Jistrum (talk) 19:37, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- "Random photo from internet"?? Have you read your statement?? I'm tired of these non-sense DRs, the image is properly sourced and was previously published on El Gráfico. Perfumo played in Cruzeiro between 1971-74 so the photo is clearly PD in Argentina (25+ years), so Keep.
- And please, before nominating a file, at least make an effort and read the data included on it. - Fma12 (talk) 10:30, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:07, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Because it is Random photo from internet Jistrum (talk) 19:47, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Keep Not a "random photo from internet" at all. The image is from an interview to Bidoglio (the subject in question) published by El Gráfico in 1934 (see source, which was detailed on file description). Fma12 (talk) 21:04, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:06, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
useless, wrong lemma. Mehlauge (talk) 20:20, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:05, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused math equation, should be in LaTeX markup, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:20, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:03, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused personal drawing, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:22, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:03, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Unused drawing of dots, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:03, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Not own work. Appeared on internet long before it was uploaded to commons (with not indication of being under a free licence) PlanespotterA320 (talk) 21:08, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:02, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
This image is credited on Wikipedia as being from the 1976 film CANANEA, which poses an issue of copyright. This video features the image but isn't licensed under a CC license, which makes me doubt that this fell into the public domain anywhere. I'd tag it as a speedy, but wanted to put it through a formal discussion just in case. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:09, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
-2019-12-06T21:09:00.000Z-File:Marcela_Fernandez_Violante.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:01, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
image with non-free license Iruka13 (talk) 22:26, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:02, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE.
- File:Talokudo o rei das paródias em 2017.jpg
- File:Jujubinha Talokudo.jpg
- File:Talokudo 2019.jpg
- File:Talokudo.jpg
Patrick Rogel (talk) 23:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC) Patrick Rogel
- Hello, as the author and holder of two direct agreements concordou em liçenciar or arquivo, this is not the official site of the baixo no rodapé do site, This work is licensed as a Licensed Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International. Link of the site that feared the author's permission https://www.talokudo.com.br/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marysuzan (talk • contribs)
- @Marysuzan: The fact that they are under a CC license is not the issue: these files are out of COM:SCOPE and besides have already been deleted for that reason. Reuploading files deleted by community consensus and abusing multiple accounts is a breach of Commons' rules. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 14:20, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Patrick Rogel Please let me know how do I add the files in COM: SCOPE
- @Marysuzan: There must be an entry about Talokudo in our sister project (Wikipedia, Wikinews, Wikidata...) before. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 14:40, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Patrick Rogel: There are some entries about Talokudo on wikipedia EN https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talokudo, and on wikidata https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q74886744
- Having these two entries, and with a license that is on the Talokudo official website, can the files be kept? I wanted your help so that the files are not deleted and are within wikimedia commons standards, I am still new to wikimedia, I wanted your help to leave these files within the rules and not deleted Patrick Rogel
- @Marysuzan: You have been blocked under the user name @Escritordepaixao: so please wait what Administrators will decide regarding these images. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 15:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Having these two entries, and with a license that is on the Talokudo official website, can the files be kept? I wanted your help so that the files are not deleted and are within wikimedia commons standards, I am still new to wikimedia, I wanted your help to leave these files within the rules and not deleted Patrick Rogel
- @Patrick Rogel: This username @Escritordepaixao is from Alexandre who works in my agency, we work for several artists, so I wanted your help to release the images of this artist Talokudo on wikimedia, we do not have the experience of publishing photos so the name from alexandre's user was eventually blocked, trying to learn to publish on his own. Knowing this, I wanted to ask for your help, to teach me how to post my artist photos on wikimedia legally and within wikimedia standards, I have all the legal rights of the artist and I wanted your help for the photos to be published. Please help me, I want to learn. Patrick Rogel
- Patrick Rogel Please let me know how do I add the files in COM: SCOPE
- @Marysuzan: The fact that they are under a CC license is not the issue: these files are out of COM:SCOPE and besides have already been deleted for that reason. Reuploading files deleted by community consensus and abusing multiple accounts is a breach of Commons' rules. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 14:20, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Comment, Patrick Rogel: there is a wikipedia article for this person on the ptwiki pt:Talokudo. Whether it is notable or not is a different matter. Ww2censor (talk) 16:01, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Elcobbola: FYI. Minorax (talk) 02:30, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Minorax: Thank you for the ping. Marysuzan is technically
Unrelated. Meatpupptry within, for example, a fan club could be an explanation, but for the moment handling will need to be based on behaviour. Эlcobbola talk 15:58, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Minorax: Thank you for the ping. Marysuzan is technically
Ticket:2019120710003355 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 05:00, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Эlcobbola talk 15:55, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Some files uploaded by Unitbv relpublice
[edit]In reverse order of upload:
- File:15. SPECTACOL 125.jpg
- File:14. FOTO 072.jpg
- File:13. FOTO 164.jpg
- File:10. DSC 7397.jpg
- File:4. DSC00658.jpg
- File:2. DSC 9153.jpg
- File:1. DSC 7751.jpg
Description reads: "Credit foto: AP Studio". No proof of permission from AP Studio. Gikü (talk) 09:16, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:11, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Lâm Trí Tú Singer (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE, not selfies.
- File:Vietnam hotboy and hotgirl - Lâm Trí Tú Singer and Ngọc Phụng Actress.png
- File:Vietnam hotboy - Lâm Trí Tú Singer.jpg
- File:VIETNAM Hotboy - Lâm Trí Tú.jpg
- File:Lâm Trí Tú - Vietnam’s famousp Singer.jpg
Patrick Rogel (talk) 11:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:09, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
This image brings nothing new or educative to the Commons Richard Avery (talk) 12:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Worthless, poor quality, redundant and out of scope. AshFriday (talk) 23:00, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:09, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
out of scope Ciaurlec (talk) 00:10, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:16, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Out of scope: private image, only in use on the user page of a user without useful contribution to the project. BrightRaven (talk) 17:10, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:18, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Out of scope: private image, only in use on the user page of a user without useful contribution to the project. BrightRaven (talk) 17:11, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:18, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Out of scope: private image, only in use on the user page of a user without useful contribution to the project. BrightRaven (talk) 17:12, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:18, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
.gif&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.gif&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
An unused file. Looks like some sort of personal artwork. Out of the project scope? Estopedist1 (talk) 19:47, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
.gif){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:19, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
.gif){kind=link}
Transmission code appears to be a Facebook image, permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 05:06, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:49, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Transmission code appears to be a Facebook image, permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 05:06, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:49, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Transmission code appears to be a Facebook image, permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 05:06, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:49, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Transmission code appears to be a Facebook image, permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 05:06, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:48, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
+ File:Logo agrohimproject665.jpg
Logo of a commercial company from Belarus. It is not known if this company exists now, but the logo remains copyrighted. Uploader is not the author of the logo GAndy (talk) 07:01, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:48, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
While all the individual components of this t-shirt design are public domain, the combined arrangement is creative and protected by copyright. I'm assuming that the uploader is claiming that they created the photograph, not the t-shirt itself. If they created the actual t-shirt, however, I suppose it's fine. Kaldari (talk) 00:25, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:08, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
source not cc-by license shizhao (talk) 02:52, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Comment See below. Suzy Oh tell me 02:56, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Suzy Oh: The license is not shown in the source.--Bradford (talk) 06:31, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Yes it is, you have to hover your mouse over that Creative Commons symbol right below the last picture, it is CC BY 4.0 Snowflake91 (talk) 10:58, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- shizhao please see the small CC-BY icon, which is grey, at the right bottom of the posted page. Jin-gook 17:04, 06 December 2019 (UTC)
- CC-BY license below the last picture. 大诺史 (Talk/留言) 12:38, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
- shizhao please see the small CC-BY icon, which is grey, at the right bottom of the posted page. Jin-gook 17:04, 06 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: license verified. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:09, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
vandalized version of c:File:Ebr1core.png Ita140188 (talk) 04:10, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Copyright violation. Source: here User3204 (talk) 04:15, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Copyright violation. Originally from here User3204 (talk) 04:25, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Facebook image, permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 05:00, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:12, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Facebook image, permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 05:00, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:12, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Facebook image, permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 05:00, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:12, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
File:ABS2304 at Lachlan Valley Railway's depot in Cootamundra shortly after being repainted in 2016.jpg
[edit]
Facebook image, permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 05:01, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:12, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Facebook image, permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 05:02, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:12, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Transmission code appears to be a Facebook image, permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 05:02, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:12, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Transmission code appears to be a Facebook image, permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 05:02, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:12, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Transmission code appears to be a Facebook image, permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 05:03, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:12, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
A better quality file exists. Brookford (talk) 09:38, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: inferior version of File:Portrait de Jean-Baptiste VAN DIEVOET (1775-1862)(1856).png. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:14, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
(1856).png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Wrong Metadata - Author is not Joel !!! Js (talk) 11:12, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:17, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Wrong Metadata - Author is not Joel !!! Js (talk) 11:13, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; in use, image doesn't qualify for courtesy deletion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:26, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Wrong Metadata - Author is not Joel !!! Js (talk) 11:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; image doesn't qualify for courtesy deletion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Wrong Metadata - Author is not Joel !!! Js (talk) 11:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; image doesn't qualify for courtesy deletion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Wrong Metadata - Author is not Joel !!! Js (talk) 11:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; image doesn't qualify for courtesy deletion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Wrong Metadata - Author is not Joel !!! Js (talk) 11:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; image doesn't qualify for courtesy deletion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Wrong Metadata - Author is not Joel !!! Js (talk) 11:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; in use, image doesn't qualify for courtesy deletion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:25, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Wrong Metadata - Author is not Joel !!! Js (talk) 11:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; image doesn't qualify for courtesy deletion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Wrong Metadata - Author is not Joel !!! Js (talk) 11:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; image doesn't qualify for courtesy deletion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Wrong Metadata - Author is not Joel !!! Js (talk) 11:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; in use, image doesn't qualify for courtesy deletion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:25, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Wrong Metadata - Author is not Joel !!! Js (talk) 11:15, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; image doesn't qualify for courtesy deletion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:24, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
metadata is wrong, author is not right Js (talk) 21:08, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. --Gbawden (talk) 07:35, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Aurélio Virgílio Veiga Rios
[edit]Out of project scope:No description or use
- File:Aurélio Virgílio Veiga Rios (9523443451).jpg
- File:Aurélio Virgílio Veiga Rios (9526175778).jpg
- File:Aurélio Virgílio Veiga Rios (9526197700).jpg
- File:Aurélio Virgílio Veiga Rios (9526214890).jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 12:25, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Disagree Sometimes, some deletion requests even seems to be a bad faith act. For this case, just a simple Google query, it turns out that the person in question returns several sources that attest to the relevance of this Brazilian magistrate. If an editor cannot read sources in the some languages, or is unaware of the culture or people of the country in question, one should be more prudent in proposing photos for deletion. Regards, Sturm (talk) 02:56, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: per User:Sturm. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:20, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
This file is not old enough, it wasn't created by the uploader. Tohma (talk) 12:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Delete. The picture can be dated circa 1930. It was taken from a magazine. More information about the photographer or the publication history is necessary. BrightRaven (talk) 10:19, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
File:TW 台灣 Taiwan TPE 台北市 Taipei City 中正區 Zhongzheng District 捷運台北車站 Taipei Main Metro MRT Station morning August 2019 IX4.jpg
[edit]
This file was initially tagged by Solomon203 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Copyrighted advertisement in Taipei City. Wdwd (talk) 12:34, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: DM, advertising posters are skewed and have glare, can't be reused for anything. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:21, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Out of project scope? Multiple replacement photos exist in the category. Taivo (talk) 13:08, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:32, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Tiny photo without metadata (156×184 pixels). I suspect not own work, but real photographer's copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 13:13, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Photo uploaded by portrayed person from his personal archives, may be kept. However, may be deleted without harm, because a correctly licensed photo of this person has been uploaded since. --Havang(nl) (talk) 17:45, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:32, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
logo vecchio e file orfano - old logo and orphan file 93.32.64.189 16:02, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:34, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
_ballot.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_ballot.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Commons:Derivative works from political parties logos. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:26, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
_ballot.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:34, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
_ballot.jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by Liebowitz1 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE.
Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:45, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: DW: photos of photos. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:35, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Useless redirect Lev. Anthony (talk) 18:20, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
![18:20, 6 December 2019 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2019/12/06#c-Lev._Anthony-2019-12-06T18:20:00.000Z-File:"Fridtjof_Nansen"_-_Genoa,_1989_01.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:36, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
![20:36, 20 December 2019 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2019/12/06#c-P199-2019-12-20T20:36:00.000Z-File:"Fridtjof_Nansen"_-_Genoa,_1989_01.jpg){kind=link}
File:2008-05-17 Coney Island, Long Island 060 Coney Island, Stillwell Avenue, Railroad Station (2678862322).jpg
[edit].jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
duplicate of File:Coney Island-Stillwell Avenue Terminus.jpg epicgenius (talk) 19:09, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: and redirected as duplicate. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:37, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Because it is Logo Jistrum (talk) 19:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep This seems like a Template:PD-textlogo to me. -- [[ axg // ✉ ]] 19:59, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Comment It has a local Wikipedia file, see File:BT TV Logo.png; I decided for the deletion per above. Regards, Jkg1997 (talk • contribs • CA) 18:28, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Even by the extremely low UK TOO standard, this appears to be PD-textlogo. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 02:26, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: per above, and in use. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:38, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
given low quality and date, doubtful to be own work PlanespotterA320 (talk) 21:02, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:38, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Copyrighted work by Aristides Vlassis (d. 2015), permission of his heirs needed via COM:OTRS. Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:45, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:39, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged as fair use and proposed for speedy deletion. It seems to simple to be copyrighted. TadejM (t/p) 23:07, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: unused logo, out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:39, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
Proszę o usunięcie pliku ponieważ konkurs na który był zgloszony zostal zakończony. Dotodot (talk) 07:49, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: Google translates the given reason as follows: "Please delete the file because the contest for which it has been submitted has ended." This is not a valid reason for deletion. --Gestumblindi (talk) 00:58, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from images with unclear copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:13, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Tento soubor byl nahrazen novou verzí. Ivana Drabiková (talk) 20:02, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by Steinsplitter. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 17:55, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work of the uploader. Most likely grabbed from the Web: http://wweufconline.com/divas/page/3/. jdx Re: 08:03, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Amada44 talk to me 22:03, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Identical to an image used on their home page - https://blog.clientpoint.net/sales-manager-skills/ - unlikely to be own work Gbawden (talk) 08:06, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Amada44 talk to me 22:04, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Duplicates uploaded by User:Țetcu Mircea Rareș
[edit]The following files were uploaded by User:Țetcu Mircea Rareș on September 30, as a part of Wiki Loves Monuments 2019. They are duplicates of the corresponding files indicated after each arrow ->
- File:Aiton_-_blazonul_nobiliar.jpg -> File:RO_CJ_Biserica_reformata_din_Aiton_(11).JPG
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Stejeris.jpg -> File:RO_CJ_Biserica_reformata_din_Stejeris_(5).JPG
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Feldioara.jpg -> File:RO_CJ_Biserica_reformata_din_Feldioara_(4).JPG
- File:Interiorul_bisericii_reformate_din_Legii.jpg -> File:Biserica_reformata_din_Legii_(8).JPG
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Rascruci.jpg -> File:RO_CJ_Biserica_reformata_din_Rascruci_(2).JPG
- File:Cublesu_Somesan_-_casetele_pictate.jpg -> File:RO_CJ_Biserica_reformata_din_Cublesu_Somesan_(91).JPG
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Viisoara_2019.jpg -> File:Biserica_reformata_din_Viisoara_(4).JPG
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Dabaca_2019.jpg -> File:RO_CJ_Biserica_reformata_din_Dabaca_(2).JPG
- File:Biserica_Pogorarea_Sfantului_Duh_din_Micesti.jpg -> File:RO_CJ_Biserica_Pogorarea_Sfantului_Duh_din_Micesti_(87).JPG
- File:Biserica_Inaltarea_Domnului_din_Bedeciu.jpg -> File:RO_CJ_Biserica_Inaltarea_Domnului_din_Bedeciu_(2).JPG
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Nima_2019.jpg -> File:Biserica_reformata_din_Nima_(5).JPG
- File:Interiorul_bisericii_reformate_din_Capusu_Mare.jpg -> File:Biserica_reformata_din_Capusu_Mare_(50).JPG
- File:Bagara_-_Masa_Domnului.jpg -> File:BagaraCJ_(18).JPG
- File:Biserica_unitariana_din_Plaiesti.jpg -> File:RO_CJ_Biserica_unitariana_din_Plaiesti_(56).JPG
- File:Unguras_-_coronamentul_amvonului.jpg -> File:Biserica_reformata_din_Unguras_(11).JPG
- File:Bustul_lui_George_Cosbuc_din_Nasaud.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Bustul_lui_George_Cosbuc_din_Nasaud_(3).jpg
- File:Biserica_Sfintii_Arhangheli_din_Feldru.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_Sfintii_Arhangheli_din_Feldru_(30).jpg
- File:Biserica_evanghelica_din_Dorolea.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_evanghelica_din_Dorolea_(1).JPG
- File:Biserica_de_lemn_din_Sarata_2019.jpg -> File:Biserica_de_lemn_din_Sarata_(5).JPG
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Reteag.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_reformata_din_Reteag_(3).jpg
- File:Biserica_evanghelica_din_Vermes.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_evanghelica_din_Vermes_Exterioare_(2).jpg
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Tonciu_2019.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_reformata_din_Tonciu_(7).jpg
- File:Scoala_din_Nasaud.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Scoala_Generala_Mihai_Eminescu_din_Nasaud_(8).jpg
- File:Castelul_Rákóczi-Bánffy_din_Urmenis.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Castelul_Rákóczi-Bánffy_din_Urmenis_(7).jpg
- File:Castelul_Lázár_Imre_din_Sarata.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Castelul_Lázár_Imre_din_Sarata_(2).jpg
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Fantanita_-_amvonul.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_reformata_din_Fantanita_(30).JPG
- File:Castelul_Haller_din_Matei.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Castelul_Haller_din_Matei_(2).jpg
- File:Scoala_din_Prundu_Bargaului.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Prundu_Bargaului_(14).JPG
- File:Turnul_bisericii_evanghelice_din_Petris.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_evanghelica_din_Petris_(10).jpg
- File:Sangeorz_-_Vila_1.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Vila_1_din_Sangeorz-Bai_(5).jpg
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Vita.jpg -> File:VitaBN.JPG
- File:Tarpiu_-_amvonul.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_evanghelica_din_Tarpiu_(32).jpg
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Strugureni.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_reformata_din_Strugureni_(6).jpg
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_satul_Sirioara.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_reformata_din_Sirioara_(14).JPG
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Sasarm.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_reformata_din_Sasarm_(5).jpg
- File:Unirea_-_portalul_intrarii.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_evanghelica_din_Unirea_(3).jpg
- File:Biserica_evanghelica_din_Viisoara.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_evanghelica_din_Viisoara_(13).jpg
- File:Biserica_de_lemn_greco-catolica_din_Spermezeu.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Spermezeu_wooden_church_11.jpg
- File:Biserica_Cuvioasa_Paraschiva_din_Maieru.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_Cuvioasa_Paraschiva_din_Maieru_(56).jpg
- File:Ansamblul_bisericii_evanghelice_din_Jelna.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_evanghelica_din_Jelna_(4).jpg
- File:Bustul_lui_Vasile_Nascu_din_Feldru.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Bustul_lui_Vasile_Nascu_din_Feldru_(6).jpg
- File:Bozies_-_Masa_Domnului.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_reformata_din_Bozies_(41).jpg
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Delureni.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_reformata_din_Delureni_(3).jpg
- File:Castelul_Teleki_-_blazonul.jpg -> File:CastelulTelekiComlod.JPG
- File:Biserica_reformata_din_Comlod.jpg -> File:ComlodBN_(27).JPG
- File:Biserica_evanghelica_din_Monariu.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_evanghelica_din_Monariu_(28).jpg
- File:Biserica_evanghelica_din_Livezile.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_evanghelica_din_Livezile_(9).JPG
- File:Biserica_de_lemn_de_la_Manastirea_Cormaia.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Manastirea_Cormaia_(49).jpg
- File:Altarul_bisericii_evanghelice_din_Slatinita.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_evanghelica_din_Slatinita_(41).jpg
- File:Dipsa_-_bolta.jpg -> File:RO_BN_Biserica_evanghelica_din_Dipsa_(53).jpg
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
If there are no other reasons for keeping them, the newer duplicates should be deleted and replaced by redirects. --Pafsanias (talk) 12:19, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Duplicates are files that have the same size, duplicates are perfect similar images which is not the case here. There are tens of thosands of photos at Commons taken from the same angle, erase them all, in fact not the bureaucrats have made the effort to gathaer them. But the isssue is not the files, despite your template which says not to concentrate on the nominator, this is only a pitiful attempt of revenge from an individual (who has not had a contribution at Commons for years) with whom I had a conflict at ro.wiki. And the way Wikipedia and Wikimedia are functioning, make possible these types of attempts. Let me remind to this individual an old and popular Romanian saying: "Răzbunarea e arma prostului". Țetcu Mircea Rareș (talk) 14:09, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- These are not simply photos taken from the same angle, but they have exactly the same time signature and unique image IDs. It is rather difficult to see what were the benefits of uploading them again under a different name as a part of a photo contest in 2019. --Pafsanias (talk) 19:21, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Looks like it might have been an attempt to get around a rule of the uploads needing to occur in September 2019 to count: Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2019/FAQ#Questions about the rules of the contest? - Purplewowies (talk) 20:08, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
- This might have been the case, indeed. However, I am not sure whether the above photos have been taken into account by the local organizers or not. Maybe we should ask their contact person. @CEllen: could you clarify this point, please? --Pafsanias (talk) 12:41, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
- Looks like it might have been an attempt to get around a rule of the uploads needing to occur in September 2019 to count: Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2019/FAQ#Questions about the rules of the contest? - Purplewowies (talk) 20:08, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: The images are not duplicates therefor I am not going to delete them. @Țetcu Mircea Rareș: : With many images here the second image does not add allot of value. Could you please in future refine your selection of images you upload?. --Amada44 talk to me 10:50, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
Reverse image search indicates this is from Pexels, license uncertain: https://www.google.com/search?tbs=sbi%3AAMhZZiuLs1IJhlFLh4qPfUEuIOWFwTtU6PUaZ-w1mxDaLDhzyq1Wq2AGCu-bNQGMZZyGW_1RpJgZTOculRqtlygiqV6uG5F21OASjUDmKwvlqIRC_1dU3ARMLYP65D6noklzm5YKy7pJwu2Ez9Z58_1UhYk8vRXjGOskZxb-pX7AWaKBWoEhD1aFOQHMWEgXLqpVCJNpe8qpvk8F7ptYWDcVs8WfJqzPHwpH63HRKOAhq53zpBjk3kohAFYCfC7a21YAF0dDoQ5HRzacbn9IQd2XWqST7cIPIwmw-MW4JOQdLM0ozAg1ipNqaoUEtzqAbthWv7Pih7bEHR1kYf6LtBHCu8xTR700uA55A&sxsrf=ACYBGNRd2WXr9ddHGwlFbW1Tjk9E9gqnXA%3A1575646948069&ei=5HbqXevoA4rr_QaA8LfgCA&q=pexels&oq=pexels&gs_l=psy-ab.3..35i39l2j0l8.22807.23619..24131...0.0..0.117.451.5j1......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i131j0i10.Z0yzXje0sIo&ved=0ahUKEwjr6oWlrqHmAhWKdd8KHQD4DYwQ4dUDCAs&uact=5 Ytoyoda (talk) 15:43, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Amada44 talk to me 10:05, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
niedriger Auflösende Kopie von File:ÜbwStÖRA-Süd.png Gunnar (💬) 23:25, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Amada44 talk to me 09:54, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
Missing permission from Jane Shin // sikander { talk } 🦖 02:37, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:04, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Copyright violation: derivative work based on a non-free photograph (COM:DW), see http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_7634000/7634154.stm Verbcatcher (talk) 02:53, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:05, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work. The depicted person cannot be an author of the photograph. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 06:15, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:17, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Inese Tenberga
[edit]Unlikely to be own work. The depicted person cannot be an author of the photograph.
Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 06:16, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:17, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Стојче Тоциновски (talk · contribs)
[edit]Copyrighted work by Emilija Tocinovska, artist's permùission needed via COM:OTRS.
Patrick Rogel (talk) 11:02, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:19, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
- also file:Citroen C2 die cast.jpg
Per COM:TOYS toy cars need OTRS-permission from producing company representative. Taivo (talk) 11:27, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:19, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
license questionable (no url, looks like its from militera.lib.ru) PlanespotterA320 (talk) 18:24, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:25, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Copyright-protected product packaging. Mizael Contreras (talk) 20:36, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:27, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
Taken in the 1950s, unlikely to be own work Gbawden (talk) 09:39, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
This photo is of my late father and is in our family's photo collection so there are no copyright issues. Please check before stating inaccurately that it is 'unlikely to be own work'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bogong56 (talk • contribs) 00:16, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
(Bogong56 (talk) 23:17, 14 January 2020 (UTC))
Bogong56 (talk) 23:17, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: An image "in our family's photo collection" is absolutely not "own work" -- it is the work of whoever actually was the photographer. He or his heirs hold the copyright and your ownership of a paper copy of it does not give you the right to license it. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:39, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Back of a Bicycle brand playing card erroneously uploaded as "own work, public domain". McGeddon (talk) 14:40, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Kept: I would be very surprised if this is not PD, either because they have been made since 1885 or because there is no copyright notice. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:10, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Yekrats as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The back of a playing card is a copyright violation, and not CC-0. Achim (talk) 10:00, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Comment Yes, the general "Bicycle back image" has been in use for the past 100 years, but there have been very slight changes over the years. If someone can find an old original Bicycle card from the 1920s, ***that*** would be out of copyright. This thread on a card magic forum discusses some of the differences in the card backs. According to that forum, Bicycle corrected some of the registration errors from their original plates which made the card backs not truly symmetrical, and they show images of the old versions and new versions. (Magicians exploit these differences, so that's why it's important to them.) Also note, the image is definitely trademarked regardless of copyright status. -- Yekrats (talk) 19:29, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion - First, there is no notice, so unless the changes are post 1989, there's no copyrihgt. Second, subtle mechanical changes almost certainly do not give rise to a new copyright, so even if the changes are recent, they aren't copyrightable. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:43, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
This image is under copyright everywhere - Bahnmoeller (talk) 14:20, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- In the summary the uploader has written why this image is out of copyright. Keep. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 13:37, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - Very few photographs actually have the copyright notice on the face within the margins. Notice is require only when published and is usually in the form of a single notice for the entire publications -- on the masthead of a periodical and the colophon of a book. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:46, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
- Undeleted: as per [2]. Yann (talk) 14:56, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&oldid=721161545#File:Ralph_Manza_John_Compton_The_D_A's_Man_1959.jpg){kind=link}
Files found with Special:Search/pexels 2019 -"archived on"
[edit]Per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Pexels CFU, photos uploaded to Pexels after July 5, 2018 are incompatible with Commons. I'm including photos that do not have Pexels links and therefore not verifiable.
- File:Photo by Your Photo Trips from Pexels.jpg
- File:Man carrying bamboo poles next to woman.jpg
- File:Pexels-1978826.jpg
- File:Pexels-photo-1068523.jpg
- File:Dylan Sprouse Headshot.jpg
- File:Plastic pollution.jpg
- File:Rio Negro Bridge, Manaus, AM, Brazil.jpg
- File:Bahalina-coconut-wine-1471975.jpg
- File:Matrix coding.jpg
- File:Bahalina-coconut-wine-1471979.jpg
- File:Huawei Matebook X Pro.png
- File:Men-s-white-and-gray-suit-3183824.jpg
- File:Premier Tower UC 2019.png
- File:Board-chalk-chalkboard-459793.jpg
- File:Estadio-Juegos-Olímpicos.jpg
- File:People Holding Rainbow Hand Fans.jpg
- File:Ancient-antique-archaeology-2225440.jpg
Ytoyoda (talk) 15:41, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: The website allows reuse, they say the photos are free to use https://www.pexels.com/photo-license/. --Gindomarlo (talk) 21:02, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. The licensure page appears to lean noncommercial, thus making the license incompatible with Commons even though it's otherwise a license that allows free use. - Purplewowies (talk) 22:00, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Purplewowies: You are completely wrong, in this section of Frequently Asked Questions they say that they do allow commercial use (https://www.pexels.com/faq/). --Gindomarlo (talk) 22:08, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Comment @Gindomarlo: But on their licensure page (whose terms don't appear to have changed since the prior established consensus on their meaning), they expressly forbid certain types of commercial use, which is why consensus at the page linked in the nom (as well as at the administrators' noticeboard as mentioned in the linked page) appears to be that, while otherwise free, it's not free enough for Commons because it prescribes conditions for the commericial use. I'd imagine if you want to change the (IMO likely) outcome of the deletion discussion, you'd need a compelling argument that would be successful in changing the prior consensus about the license's terms. - Purplewowies (talk) 22:22, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Purplewowies: The website says that commercial use is allowed:
- @Purplewowies: You are completely wrong, in this section of Frequently Asked Questions they say that they do allow commercial use (https://www.pexels.com/faq/). --Gindomarlo (talk) 22:08, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- "Can I use the photos and videos for a commercial project? Yes, all photos and videos are free for commercial use. You can use them on your commercial website, blog, product or anywhere else." (https://www.pexels.com/faq/). --Gindomarlo (talk) 23:01, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Gindmarlo: But the very next question Q&A goes:
- Can I sell photos or videos from Pexels?
- You can't sell photos or videos licensed under the Pexels License as they are. This includes selling them as prints (posters, postcards, …) or on physical goods (t-shirts, cups, …). You can only sell them if you edited, modified or otherwise added value. And you're not allowed to sell or upload them on other stock photo or wallpaper platforms (however you can use our API to show Pexels photos and videos on your site or app). (emphasis mine)
- That actually seems restrictive? Ytoyoda (talk) 03:18, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- I almost want to ask them directly if Commons counts as something like a "stock photo platform" because if it did, we would have a very firm answer for if their license was free enough to be here. But I always feel like I can't or shouldn't do that, even when there's a contact URL (which there is). - Purplewowies (talk) 00:51, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Gindmarlo: But the very next question Q&A goes:
- "Can I use the photos and videos for a commercial project? Yes, all photos and videos are free for commercial use. You can use them on your commercial website, blog, product or anywhere else." (https://www.pexels.com/faq/). --Gindomarlo (talk) 23:01, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: Until they make up their mind - What is allowed? - then no, I don't see an adequate reason to delete. The only way I found one of the photos listed was from a Google search with the label of "reuse with modification" (the least restrictive of the usage rights) -- hence, if Google recognises it as such, I don't see why we shouldn't. MelbourneStar (talk) 10:29, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. At https://www.pexels.com/photo-license/, the web site says:
- "What is not allowed:
- 1) Don't sell unaltered copies of a photo, e.g. don't sell it as a stock photo, poster, print or on a physical product without adding any value.
- 3) Don't redistribute or sell the photos on other stock photo or wallpaper platforms."
- [numbers added for convenience]
- "What is not allowed:
Item (1) prohibits printing images on tee shirts or posters, which we require. Item (3) explicitly forbids uploading to Commons, which is a stock photo platform. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:51, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Historical book. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Comment Probably the author Austin Holyoake is this person (Library of Congress Authorities entry) who died in 1874? If yes, then I would suggest tagging this as {{PD-old-auto-expired|deathyear=1874}} and keeping it. Gestumblindi (talk) 02:18, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:00, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Thebrotherhoood (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE.
- File:Booky Blanco performing in front of 2,000 fans at Rutgers Unity Day in 2017 (Pt 2).jpg
- File:Booky Blanco performing in front of 2,000 fans at Rutgers Unity Day in 2017.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Patrick Rogel (talk) 17:04, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - also copyvio as the author is not the uploader. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:01, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Iran's copyright law does not have a clause for threshold of originality; see Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Iran Huji (talk) 19:49, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:01, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Patrick Rogel as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://ruskino.ru/art/8664/gallery
Converted by me to regular DR to allow for discussion, as external hit is undated and has far lower resolution than our upload. -- Túrelio (talk) 08:03, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: it was tagged on the same day of the upload, so the website pre-dates it, meaning that the image was already published. That requires at least an OTRS ticket. But looking at the other uploads of this user, I have have my doubts about the uploader's reliability. I will start another DR for those. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:40, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Likely a screenshot and thereby not own work. -- Túrelio (talk) 14:25, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Ticket:2019121110002661 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 12:00, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Not valid permission IMHO as per above. Customer fail to prove authorship. --Ganímedes (talk) 01:12, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per User:Ganímedes, otrs-member. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:52, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Following Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:Flag_of_Nantou_County.svg, it looks like that the clauses of GWOIA don't really feel like a "free license", @Jameslwoodward: points that one term of that is somewhat "CC BY-ND"-like, which holds up the rights of modification. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:55, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Jameslwoodward and Wcam: ^^ --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:56, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: You may want to include {{Attribution CWB}} and {{LY-GWOIA}} in this DR as well. --Wcam (talk) 12:35, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Nah, just GWOIA here. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:58, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: You may want to include {{Attribution CWB}} and {{LY-GWOIA}} in this DR as well. --Wcam (talk) 12:35, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- (I'll use this version from the President's Office for reference https://www.president.gov.tw/Page/18 .)
- That analysis was not correct. The clause 使用本授權提供之資料與素材，不得惡意變更其相關資訊，若利用後所展示之資訊與原資料與素材不符，使用者須自負民事、刑事上之法律責任。 is merely saying reusers have to face civil or criminal consequences by themselves if they reuse the files in a bad faith manner. In other words, the licensor/copyright owner is not responsible for reusers' misuse. It's not saying people cannot modify the files. Reusers of course have to consider such legal consequences even if this clause is not present. For instance, the penal code must have outlawed spread of false info that causes public danger or panic, and defamation laws apply for damages incurred on individuals.--Roy17 (talk) 12:09, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Pinging uploaders (include those who re-uploaded) of affected files: @Mangwanani, Zscout370, Akjz, Jitcji, and Wc721: @Happy60907, Bowleerin, KOKUYO, Szqecs, and Wcam: @S099001, Howard61313, BritoHsieh, Leolokey, and Wildcursive: @Natureindex, Vincenty846, Adece033090, Aotfs2013, and BoyuZhang1998: @Taiwania Justo, 卡達, Qqkuro66541, 兆C, and Alexchris: @Li22943035, Df910105, 葉又嘉, Momocalbee, and Matt8830: @Brror, Ericliu1912, 淳祐, 古明地戀, and Ogk5d: @Lmmnhn, It's Our Time, Jimmy3421, SSYoung, and It's gonna be awesome: @ArjanH, Alankang, 北極企鵝觀賞團, Willy1018, and Assanges: @Kanashimi, Solomon203, Chitalee, 紀橋, and 張宇文: @S.user3040, Tibet Nation, Tze Chiang Hao, Kaoru777, and 欸你過來一下: if one day this template has to be deleted (or at least deprecated), please consider if your files are suitable for another license template or not, if not, then everyone include you and me are feel free to nominate deletion them. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:24, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep PerRoy17 COM:NCR applies here, @Jameslwoodward: I strongly urge you to write an apologizing email to every Taiwanese Commons users. --117.136.55.109 00:47, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep，不能惡意更改 是指不可以惡意曲解網站上的內容，並非不能更改。--葉又嘉 (talk) 07:22, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- 這裡的禁止惡意更改，指的是 禁止不當變更權，而非不能更改--葉又嘉 (talk) 07:27, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, but I don't read it that way. Google translates
- "使用本授權提供之資料與素材，不得惡意變更其相關資訊，若利用後所展示之資訊與原資料與素材不符，使用者須自負民事、刑事上之法律責任。"
as
- "Use of the materials and materials provided by this license shall not maliciously change the relevant information. If the information displayed after use does not match the original materials and materials, the user shall bear civil and criminal legal liabilities."
I welcome any corrections or adjustments to that translation, but it is what we have, so far.
The first sentence there is a clear imperative not to deface the image with, for example, "I hate [the subject of the image]". It does not rely on other law and is itself a copyright restriction.
The second sentence is very clear: "If the information displayed after use does not match the original materials and materials..." [emphasis added]. That prohibits any change whatsoever in the image, even such minor changes as cropping, or adjusting colors. It also prohibits modifying an image by cloning out things in the background that are distracting or blurring copyrighted items appearing in the image. As I said in the earlier discussion, that is exactly what an ND restriction prohibits. Since cropping an image cannot possibly subject one to civil and criminal liabilities, the second sentence must rely on copyright to be enforceable and is therefore not an NCR.. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:11, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- We need not use Google Translate. For the benefit of those who insists on reference to English, see this copy https://english.president.gov.tw/Page/18 .
- The first clause—The users are not limited to time and by region to reproduce, adapt, edit, publicly transmit or utilize with other methods, and as well as to develop various products or services (herein known as derivations)—categorically dismisses User:Jameslwoodward's concerns.
- As I have explained, clause 4 is merely a reminder to reusers that they shall bear any civil or criminal consequences by themselves (so the copyright owner is not responsible when information presented in derivations are misleading). This nuance is what 自 means, but is not reflected in the official English translation. It is pretty clear to any Chinese users though.--Roy17 (talk) 13:13, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Roy17: I'm afraid that their "English translation" is a bit reworded, thus we need help from at least one Taiwanese linguist to confirm it. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:40, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: I'm born and educated in Taiwan. User:Roy17's explanation is proper and clear for those who can't read Chinese. Moreover, the sentence "the user is liable for civil and criminal legal responsibilities." includes the meaning of "自" already. If the word "himself" were added here, it will become redundant. --Akira123 talk 04:04, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Roy17: I'm afraid that their "English translation" is a bit reworded, thus we need help from at least one Taiwanese linguist to confirm it. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:40, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
An example of maliciously altering information: https://i.imgur.com/U445mkQ.jpg https://i.imgur.com/dvFl0FF.jpg . I added the fake info to the photos from https://www.president.gov.tw/NEWS/19942 . Such action is not restricted by copyright as GWOIA permits adaptation, but Ma Yingjeou or Taiwan's public prosecution might sue me for libel. (If what I added were not File:Danghui.svg or the libelous text but say a cartoon character, there would be no criminal consequences as freedom of speech prevails.)--Roy17 (talk) 18:03, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
Again, the first sentence says,
- "Use of the materials and materials provided by this license shall not maliciously change the relevant information.
That means that I cannot take an image that is licensed under GWOIA and write across it "I hate [the subject of the image]". That would not be illegal or actionable in any way, so the only basis on which the entity issuing the GWOIA can forbid it is copyright. That is, in effect, a No Derivatives license, albeit one that limits only certain kinds of derivatives. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:46, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
- I don't see it that way at all. The clause seems more like moral rights to me -- if it's clear the modification is by someone else, such as your example, it's fine. Usually "malicious" means making a change while making it seem as though it was part of the original author's work -- so if you change the work into an attack image, while making it seem as though the change came from the original author, that would not be allowed. Using Google Translate is good for getting the gist of the text, but you can't parse every word carefully like you do with in-language laws or licenses. The gist I get is that anything is allowed provided the source is mentioned, but stuff which violates moral rights or other laws is not, which is fine for a license. Obviously, if you use a freely-licensed file to slander someone, you are liable for any penalties for that. The translation in the template explicitly allows adaptation and editing, so it is obviously a more focused situation they are describing, which is many licenses is about not violating moral rights (which CC licenses also disallows) or other laws similar in nature. Their English translation isn't all that great, but it seems like a free license to me in all respects, and native speakers above seem to agree. Keep for me. Carl Lindberg (talk) 00:33, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Jameslwoodward: when you write I hate [the subject of the image], you were merely expressing your opinion and not altering the information (which is that the photo shows the subject).
- btw, this point is rather futile if google translated text is still relied upon.--Roy17 (talk) 23:58, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Roy17: Please consider sending some emails to Executive Yuan (行政院) employees to confirm that how their "prohibiting the right to hate some employees" are also kind of copyright-based freedom, otherwise, my position is now the same as Jim said, this is CC BY-ND clause, not a NCR, unless if EYuan can consider to modify their clauses to allow users to hate some random employees. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:00, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
- Looking at the English version linked above, the thing that jumps out to me is may be reauthorized. Compare the US law under title 105: Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government. That may be a translation problem, but the difference in English is pretty big. May be reauthorized expresses existential possibility, while is not available expresses existential certainty. May be reauthorized, just going on the bare substance of the wording, isn't really any different than normal copyright protection, where the owner may do many things, though there is no guarantee that they will do any of them.
- Has this been brought up in the Taiwanese court system or internationally? Is this just poor choice of English wording? GMGtalk 14:00, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
- I *think* all that is saying (native speakers correct me) is that this license is allowed to be placed on the presidential website, but that it is not automatic -- meaning we need to see the license actually on the website. Seems like it was in the form of an announcement, i.e. a policy first announced elsewhere, but then placed on the website to make it active. There are several places in that English translation where the wording seems a bit odd for legalese, so it would be good to hear from a native speaker on what that section means. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:41, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
- My concern is that even if this was intended to be a free license, and if we are to take the English version as authoritative (as opposed to a non-binding haphazardly translated document from some intern, purely for informational purposes), then it may be worded so badly that it is effectively not a free license. For a native-English free license, the difference between is/may and authorized/reauthorized would be fundamentally breaking. GMGtalk 16:46, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
- The Chinese text is 以無償、非專屬，得再授權之方式提供公眾使用
- which means
- free of charge 無償
- non-exclusive 非專屬
- may be reauthorised 得再授權
- manner 方式
- for members of public to use 提供公眾使用
- The whole sentence means members of public can use the presidential office copyrighted works without payment and in a non-exclusive manner and members of public may reauthorise third parties to use it. For example, I use the president's photo in my video. My video can be reused by others because I am permitted (得) to re(再)-authorise(授權).--Roy17 (talk) 23:58, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
- Here's a different English translation by the Taipei City govt https://english.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=4E3FA84AC9A12D24&sms=5E019B60E5224755&s=52C7D2409618530A of the same Chinese text [3], which corroborates my explanation.--Roy17 (talk) 00:09, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
- Oookay. Yes. The version by the Taipei City Government is much more clearly written with legal implications in mind, rather than as an ad hoc translation. If we are to use this translation, then it does seem that this might be an NCR issue. It doesn't make clear what civil or criminal liability users may be subject to. I'd like to know what this liability would be, but copyright is generally not a criminal matter. If this liability is anything other than under Taiwanese copyright law, then it's really not our problem, other than to do our due diligence in warning reusers. GMGtalk 03:47, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
- My concern is that even if this was intended to be a free license, and if we are to take the English version as authoritative (as opposed to a non-binding haphazardly translated document from some intern, purely for informational purposes), then it may be worded so badly that it is effectively not a free license. For a native-English free license, the difference between is/may and authorized/reauthorized would be fundamentally breaking. GMGtalk 16:46, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
- I *think* all that is saying (native speakers correct me) is that this license is allowed to be placed on the presidential website, but that it is not automatic -- meaning we need to see the license actually on the website. Seems like it was in the form of an announcement, i.e. a policy first announced elsewhere, but then placed on the website to make it active. There are several places in that English translation where the wording seems a bit odd for legalese, so it would be good to hear from a native speaker on what that section means. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:41, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Per GMG, very enough to be judged as a ND instead of NCR. GWOIA official website is even under CC-BY-NC-ND. --223.104.7.116 00:36, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per Roy17 and Carl Lindberg. —— Eric Liu（留言．百科用戶頁） 04:01, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Ericliu1912: You mean, prohibiting users to "hate some images" is also a kind of NCR case instead of CC BY-ND case? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:55, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
- Not per "that", I just agree with him on some point. —— Eric Liu（留言．百科用戶頁） 07:03, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Ericliu1912: You mean, prohibiting users to "hate some images" is also a kind of NCR case instead of CC BY-ND case? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:55, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per Carl Lindberg. A free license can contain languages that prevent moral right violations. --Wcam (talk) 12:40, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Wcam: Hey you're wrong, really wrong, CC BY(-SA) won't prohibit users to make moral violations e.g. any kinds of hating, or just re-doing terrorism e.g. something happened in Kyoto, Japan on July 18 of last year, such restrictions should better be made by Terms of Use, if such restrictions are written by the license files, e.g. the CC BY-ND's clauses, then it's just a non-free license, by an actual free license, you or others should allow me to download e.g. file:柯文哲參加「臺北—光州友誼連線 夢想起飛」記者會 05.jpg, then I make some random calligraphies and claim 柯文哲 as a Taiwanese junkyard. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:32, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
- No, you are wrong. Please see [4]: “all CC licenses preserve moral rights to the extent they exist”. Then per your argument above Commons should reject all CC licenses because they are all non-free. --Wcam (talk) 05:18, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Wcam: Hey you're wrong, really wrong, CC BY(-SA) won't prohibit users to make moral violations e.g. any kinds of hating, or just re-doing terrorism e.g. something happened in Kyoto, Japan on July 18 of last year, such restrictions should better be made by Terms of Use, if such restrictions are written by the license files, e.g. the CC BY-ND's clauses, then it's just a non-free license, by an actual free license, you or others should allow me to download e.g. file:柯文哲參加「臺北—光州友誼連線 夢想起飛」記者會 05.jpg, then I make some random calligraphies and claim 柯文哲 as a Taiwanese junkyard. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:32, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
- Keep I do think that there are some non-free licences that have snuck into Commons, but this is not one of them. The clauses appear to me to be akin AS-IS clause in free software licences, or many of the clauses that state that when you attribute the work you are not allowed to use it as endorcement. I think that misunderstanding comes from confusing a free licence with public domain work, a confusion that is very widespread in our community. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 08:21, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
- Delete I think that Perabove-ism should be dropped here. By reading the original document, I also rather agree Jim's comment that that's a CC-BY-ND clause, @Roy17, 葉又嘉, Akira123, Shangkuanlc, and Carl Lindberg: @Ericliu1912, Wcam, and Gone Postal: at least I believe that the "If the information displayed after use does not match the original materials and materials, the user shall bear civil and criminal legal liabilities." is already disallowing freedom of modifications aka. derivatives as that's disallowing the rights of hating of works. So Please consider another keep reason rather than confusing "per above". --117.136.54.107 00:31, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- So it's a ND license, except it allows users to edit and adapt the work? That makes little sense. There are, as always, certain modifications (and perhaps straight uses) that can violate other, non-copyright laws, and any re-user is fully liable for those of course. The fact that the copyright is licensed does not exempt a re-user from other laws, but there should be no copyright issue. The wording that GMG was worried about sounds like a sublicensing clause which was translated poorly, which is odd in a free license but not really harmful. Carl Lindberg (talk) 06:09, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
- Hello, anon. Welcome to Commons. Let's consider an analogous example. I currently make lots of pictures of post offices, let's say I will start setting up a camera and appear as a random stranger in those photos (Tarantino style). I then continue posting these images stating that you can use, alter, redistribute them... however, I warn that were you to alter me into a Neo-Nazi you will face civil and criminal liability. Is this now a non-free licence? No, this is an example of COM:NCR. What you are confusing it with is another example, where I would do the same thing, but then say that you are disallowed to use my images on any Neo-Nazi websites. That is a copyright restriction, and that would not be allowed. Copyright does not deal with facts at all, but rather with the expression of those facts. Now. Here is where I see what you are saying: if we were to read the part that you wrote in the sence "You are disallowed to compile this work with other works that express opposing views", and in such a case we would need to consider to to be a non-free licence. Unfortunately, I am not a lawyer. And I honestly think that this is something that we can ask Wikimedia lawyers to give us their opinions. At this moment I am still leaning towards a weak keep vote, but I would actually not upload any files under that licence myself. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 06:11, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I'm staff of Wikimedia Taiwan. Several years ago, a similar discussion happened on Chinese Wikipedia, and I wrote a mail to Lin Cheng-Hsia (林誠夏), the ex-organizer of Creative Commons Taiwan. As his opinion, the license is compatible with CC-BY (3.0). The paragraph "使用本授權提供之資料與素材，不得惡意變更其相關資訊，若利用後所展示之資訊與原資料與素材不符，使用者須自負民事、刑事上之法律責任。" is just a reminding to users, a statement about Moral rights instead of Copyrights. For example, if someone edited the photo, changed the Flag of the Republic of China in the photo to the Five-star Red Flag, though it's allowed under a free-license, but still have some problems in other law. The paragraph is only a warning for these situations. However, if you just reuse the origin photo and note "I hate it", it doesn't matter under the license.--Reke (talk) 12:17, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. It looks abundantly clear that there are no limitations regarding derivative works of media files released under this license. --ƏXPLICIT 08:16, 25 March 2020 (UTC)