Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2020/06/03
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(8).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![166 File:Scars from different "abductees".jpg](#File:Scars_from_different_"abductees".jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(Zeno_Ansichtskarten).jpg){kind=link}
{{Duplicate |file=Niizaki Station North 002 May2020.jpg |reason= |user= }} Drph17 (talk) 09:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, duplicate-processed. --Túrelio (talk) 10:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
не хочу размещать Андрей Олешко (talk) 14:46, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, speedied per G7, as filed on day of upload. --Túrelio (talk) 18:33, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
It was posted by me in error. Lakerunr (talk) 15:33, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim (talk) 15:35, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
No free licence, "intended for press-related use only" Magnus (talk) 17:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Non-trivial logo. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 17:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
No free licence, "intended for press-related use only" Magnus (talk) 17:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Non-trivial logo. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 17:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
I uploaded this by mistake - Paul Stebbings Paul Stebbings (talk) 18:44, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim (talk) 19:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
No longer want Balaye-Pro (talk) 15:42, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio at 18:27, 3 Juni 2020 UTC: No longer want --Krdbot 02:10, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
X luí lokdfvvvxkpoxf dollYyfjyipppppmhbvvhgrdybhjfvgkuy 2806:102E:17:BF3A:9AD6:94D2:8D91:8BD5 22:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense. --Achim (talk) 06:29, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Copyright protected image by German television broadcaster KiKa. Christian Bolz (talk) 09:14, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 10:41, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
According to infobox, image of German public broadcasters MDR/Saxonia Media without any further license information. Christian Bolz (talk) 09:16, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio so speedy. --Herby talk thyme 10:40, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
privacy reason Mimihitam (talk) 12:51, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, speedied due to serious privacy issue. --Túrelio (talk) 17:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE, undeletion turned down (Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2020-02#File:Omar_Faruk_Shihab.jpg). A new Wikidata entry has been created since the previous DR though https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q66132418 was deleted for notability issues. Patrick Rogel (talk) 15:47, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination recreation of previously deleted content -- this is a {{Speedy}}. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:09, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Suspected Flickr washing - visual characteristics suggest screenshots from video(s) (COM:DW)
Эlcobbola talk 15:43, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
- It should be deleted if the file is copyright and it's original author has not licensed it under creative commons for Wikimedia use. I'm afraid I did mistake once again. Thanks for tagging it. C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 01:33, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
- Still expecting to be autopatrolled? --E4024 (talk) 01:46, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Comment all files under Special:Search/insource:love70 should be deleted.--BevinKacon (talk) 19:40, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
Delete all per BevinKacon. I think the closing admin should take the opportunity to warn the uploader that this is not a porn album. --E4024 (talk) 21:28, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 12:27, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
No evidence of a free license at the source page.
- File:Priya Chauhan 6.jpg
- File:Priya Chauhan 5.jpg
- File:Priya Chauhan 4.jpg
- File:Priya Chauhan 2.jpg
- File:Priya Chauhan.jpg
- File:Priya Chauhan 3.jpg
. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Keep, I see "License
Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)" at https://youtube.com/watch?v=1LTaN6RTMjY . — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 01:09, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Jameslwoodward: @Jeff G.: As the files DR was started by you. But now I have tagged for speedy delete as you suggested. What will happen now. please reply C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 03:12, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- @C1K98V: You are not a license reviewer and are thus not allowed to use COM:CSD#F4, so I undid your tags. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:48, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: I have tagged few other upload of mine. I have to undo those edits. Please reply C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 03:50, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- @C1K98V: I undid those, too, but they are off-topic in this discussion so please reply on my user talk page. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:09, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: I have tagged few other upload of mine. I have to undo those edits. Please reply C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 03:50, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- @C1K98V: You are not a license reviewer and are thus not allowed to use COM:CSD#F4, so I undid your tags. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:48, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Withdrawn by nom. Sorry, the source link was defective in all six files. For all six files, I
- fixed source link
- added License Review
- removed over categorization
. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:30, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
не хочу размещать работу Андрей Олешко (talk) 14:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MB-one (talk) 09:15, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Elle Gabrielle (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope. Files were uploaded with the sole purpose of promoting a non-notable organization (see ro:ARIR)
- File:Forum ARIR 2019.jpg
- File:Gala ARIR 2020.jpg
- File:ARIR - Asociația pentru relații cu Investitorii.png
Gikü (talk) 00:10, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:05, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barbie Expo
[edit]Per COM:TOYS
- File:A display of Barbies at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Another close up of display Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Antique Rose Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Arwen and Aragon Lord of the Rings Inspired Barbie Dolls at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Audrey Hepburn Breakfast at Tiffanys Inspired Barbie Dolls at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Badgley Mischka inspired Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Burberry Inspired doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Byron Lars designed Tatu Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Close up Barbie doll display Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Empress of the Aliens Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Enchanted Mermaid Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Fearie Queen Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Goddess of Spring Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Images at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Madam du Barbie Bob Mackie Inspired Barbie Dolls at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Maroon Bob Mackie Inspired Barbie Dolls at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Moon Goddess and Goddess of the Sun Bob Mackie Inspired Barbie Dolls at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Pretty Pleats, Debut, and The Shopgirl dolls at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Prince William and Kate Middleton Wedding Inspired Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Princess of Ancient Mexico Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Princess of China Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Princess of the French Court Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Princess of the Incas Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Superhero close up at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:The Peacock doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Vampire Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Various Barbie dolls at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Wizard of Oz Inspired Barbie Dolls at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Zombie Bride Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
— Racconish 💬 07:52, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:08, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barbie dolls
[edit]See COM:VPC#Dimension of derivative works: photos of copyrighted toys are derivative works of the toys. This leaves only a few photos in the category which I believe are either de minimis or ineligible for copyright. Some of the photos are actually not toys but packaging with complex art.
- File:Barbie 1959 First Editions.jpg
- File:Barbie Fashion Model.JPG
- File:Barbie nudism.jpg
- File:BarbieAntes1997Despues.jpg
- File:Barbieswaistwidens.jpg
- File:Dior New Look.jpg
- File:Dye decolourisation at labscale and microscale SOPHIED.jpg
- File:Early Barbie doll en suite 01.jpg
- File:Early Barbie doll en suite 02.jpg
- File:Elch01m.jpg
- File:JjcobwebbBarbie.jpg
- File:Ken Carson.jpg
- File:Mattelno1br.jpg
File:Polaroid Barbie Pink Instant 600 Film Camera.jpg- File:Study of a murder on a Barbie figurine.jpg
- File:Sunning (2179966897).jpg
- File:Whitney Houston Barbie I Wanna Dance 1.jpg
- File:Whitney Houston Barbie I Wanna Dance 2.jpg
- File:Álbum+da+barbie.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Stefan4 (talk) 19:47, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- With reference to File:Early Barbie doll en suite 01.jpg and File:Early Barbie doll en suite 02.jpg (admittedly not among my better photos), and possibly some others here (I haven't looked through the batch) I would guess that the only elements here that were copyrighted and had their copyrights renewed are Barbie and Ken, who make up a pretty small portion of the pictures, albeit arguably constitute its main interest. But I'm not weighing in either way on the issue, you're welcome to delete these if people think it actually raises a copyright problem. - Jmabel ! talk 20:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- So dollhouses aren't copyrighted? In that case, those two pictures are probably fine. --Stefan4 (talk) 16:37, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- But note COM:FOP#United States: "The term building means structures that are habitable by humans and intended to be both permanent and stationary, such as houses and office buildings, and other permanent and stationary structures designed for human occupancy, including but not limited to churches, museums, gazebos, and garden pavilions." I'm not sure if a dollhouse is permanent, stationary or designed for human occupancy. --Stefan4 (talk) 20:27, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Searching all the copyright renewals would be a pain, but RE0000280638 and RE0000280637 are renewals for 1958 Barbies, which seem to protect all later Barbies.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:41, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- Keep File:Polaroid Barbie Pink Instant 600 Film Camera.jpg -- where do you see a "toy" or "complex art" there? Trycatch (talk) 16:19, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- I think I must have ticked that checkbox by mistake. I don't see any problem with that photo. --Stefan4 (talk) 16:37, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- So you don't think the flower pattern sticker is copyrightable?--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Keep that one. De728631 (talk) 21:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Keep File:Dior New Look.jpg -- The appearance of the doll is totally unrelated to the purpouse of the photograph, which is to illustrate the New Look stetic trend created by Christian Dior in 1947. This is the only illustration of such work which appears in Wikipedia, thus this photograph existance is justified and required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.164.52.50 (talk • contribs) 2012-02-19T18:54:30 (UTC)
- This is not Wikipedia and it still looks like a copyvio. --Stefan4 (talk) 19:03, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Stefan, delete that file. De728631 (talk) 21:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Delete all but File:Polaroid Barbie Pink Instant 600 Film Camera.jpg. De728631 (talk) 21:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Keep all. --Guil2027 (talk) 00:19, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Why? --Stefan4 (talk) 00:30, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Why not? --Guil2027 (talk) 00:32, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- delete - there can be no question that dolls are protected by copyright under US law and that Barbie is covered by that. de minimis aside (eg a picture of a child's room or a shelf full or mixed toys) we can not keep any images of Barbie. --h-stt !? 11:07, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- Delete - indeed, these images constitute derivative works of copyrighted material. According to Commons:Derivative works, "action figures do not have utilitarian aspects and are therefore generally copyrighted as works of fine art." These images (barring the ones pointed out above) seem no exception. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 14:00, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- keep - I dont understand why you would want to delete these.(File:Barbie Fashion Model.JPG). It is not copyright violation if you use the image of an item that is copyrighted in a creative commons sense, especially if that image was taken by an individual (such as the one I quoted, which I took). Memory Alpha does that all the time with respect ot screen caps from various Star Trek shows/movies - which are all copyrighted materials. With that regard, you might as well then delete all pics on wikiepdia because what they photograph is copyrighted in one way or another. Image File:Barbie Fashion Model.JPG was modified by me in terms of how the doll's hair is done and how she is dressed. The original dolls wasn't even dressed like this or looked like this. By that account, every person who uploads a picture of a fashion doll on flickr, let's say, would be prohibited from doing so. And everyone taking a picture of a barbie they want to sell on ebay is also also violating copyright? SOFA and PIPA havent become laws yet. This just doesnt make sense. --CarrieBee (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, those people are violating copyright, unless it qualifies as fair use. However, Commons doesn't allow fair use. --Stefan4 (talk) 21:02, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
- Keep all. The main problem I see here, and with these kind of multiple nominations, is that none of the pictures were taken by the same person in the same place. Multiple countries permit a total freedom of panorama—including 3D and 2D art, somes with the condition that should be taken in a public place (File:Sunning (2179966897).jpg), but public place is not necessarily a park or street; or even if the toy still copyrighted in the country of origin. If you want to delete them you have to investigate where they were taken, if the toy still copyrighted and then nominate them onr-by-one. Tbhotch™ 22:25, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- Other example of what cannot be considered a copyvio or fair use is File:Study of a murder on a Barbie figurine.jpg, where the toy is not visible at all. Tbhotch™ 22:26, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- The sculpted details are.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:23, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- With rare exception, countries with FOP only include permanently installed works. File:Sunning (2179966897).jpg was taken in Hawaii, and FOP doesn't apply at all for sculpture in the US.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:23, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- Unless tagged with {{FoP-Israel}} or anything similar, I think that we have to assume that photos of dolls are unfree per COM:PRP. --Stefan4 (talk) 23:37, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- Delete. Unfortunately, I don't believe any of these images qualify for Commons (for reasons stated by others above). However, several of them would most definitely qualify as "fair-use" for use on Wikipedia. That being said, most of these aren't exactly "first-class" images and I believe most could easily be removed without much detriment to their respective articles (no offense to any of the photographers, but many appear rather "amateurish"). The remaining images that appear to be well-done could be reuploaded to their repsective Wikipedias with "fair-use" rationales (although I admit that will create a lot of "busy work" for the editors left to do the "clean-up"). I'm not a "professional" photographer, but I have access to a large assortment of Barbies (from various eras) and could easily take some nice professional looking photos to fill in some of the "gaps" that may result after the majority of less-than-steller images are removed. --- Crakkerjakk (talk) 11:44, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep all, for the reasons that Tbhotch mentioned above. Acdx (talk) 12:12, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It would appear that the copyright on Barbie dolls was renewed, making the vast majority of these non-free derivative works, which are strictly prohibited on Commons. There does seem to be consensus to keep File:Polaroid Barbie Pink Instant 600 Film Camera.jpg, so I've done that. FASTILY (TALK) 23:51, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barbie dolls
[edit]See COM:TOYS.
- File:Barbie Dolls.jpg
- File:Barbie Drawing.JPG
- File:Barbies.jpg
- File:Boneca Barbie.jpg
- File:Expozice sběratelských panenek Barbie v Galerii DollsLand.gif
- File:How to lose weight.JPG
- File:Ken.JPG
Stefan4 (talk) 21:15, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Deleted . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barbie dolls
[edit]Derivative works per COM:TOYS.
- File:'hole in a halter' top and wrap dress in leso.JPG
- File:'hole in a halter' top and wrap dress in Nigerian.JPG
- File:'kikoi' wrap skirt and halter top.JPG
- File:'kikoi' wrap skirt and side tied top.JPG
- File:1950s Inspired Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:2 piece maasai style wrap of tetron and lace.JPG
- File:3 piece maasai style wrap of tetron and lace.JPG
- File:AFRICAN - AMERICAN.JPG
- File:Alvin Ailey inspires Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Ankle lenghth apron, back skirt and halter top.JPG
- File:Ankle lenghth apron, side slitted back kirt and wrap top with leso edging.JPG
- File:Apron and slit skirt front view.JPG
- File:Apron concept with extended back tie sash.JPG
- File:Apron concept with leso edged bodice.JPG
- File:APRON CONCEPT.JPG
- File:APRON DRESS & BACK SKIRT.JPG
- File:APRON DRESS.JPG
- File:ARMLESS KANGA.JPG
- File:BACK TO NATURE.JPG
- File:Bantu hem skirt and halter top.JPG
- File:Barbie1.jpg
- File:Barby blond.jpg
- File:BASICALLY.JPG
- File:BLACK & WHITE.JPG
- File:BLUE KANGA CLOAK.JPG
- File:Bob Mackie Inspired Barbie Dolls at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Brides maids in leaf print kanga wraps.JPG
- File:Bustier apron and back skirt.JPG
- File:Bustier apron dress elaborated with hanky cut leso train.JPG
- File:Bustier apron dress hyphenated with ribbon.JPG
- File:Bustier apron dress with lace sash -back view.JPG
- File:Bustier apron dress with lace sash-front view.JPG
- File:Bustier apron in american denim.JPG
- File:Bustier apron style evening dress.JPG
- File:Bustier apron style wedding dress-back view.JPG
- File:Bustier apron style wedding dress.JPG
- File:Butier apron dress and hanky cut train-back view.JPG
- File:Byron Lars designed Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Byron Lars designed Cinnabar Sensation Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Cabaret Dancers Dolls at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:CHIC ETHNIC.jpg
- File:Christian Dior inspired Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:CLOAK & WRAP DRESS.JPG
- File:CORPORATE IN THE JUNGLE.JPG
- File:Costumes Inspired by France at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Couture Wedding Bob Mackie Inspired Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:CROP TOP WRAP.JPG
- File:Crop top, skirt and maasai style wrap with modesty waist cover.JPG
- File:Dance Til Dawn Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Disney inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Disney Mouseketeer inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Eiffel Tower inspired Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:EMPIRE KANGA.JPG
- File:EMPIRE.JPG
- File:Escada Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Faberge inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Faraway Forest Elf Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:FIT & FLARE APRON.JPG
- File:Formal Dress Barbie doll at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Foundation wrap dress and beaded sash.JPG
- File:Foundation wrap dress and cloak in Nigerian.JPG
- File:Fulla 2016 Present doll.jpg
- File:Goddess of the Galaxy Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:HALTER DRESS.JPG
- File:HALTER TOP & TROUSER.JPG
- File:HALTER TOPS & APRON LINE SKIRT.JPG
- File:Hanae Mori designed Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:INDIA - KENYA.JPG
- File:India Inspired, Princess of India, and Diwali Inspired Barbies at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Inuit Legend and Venetian Opulence dolls at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Joan Jett inspired Inspired Barbie Dolls at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:KANGA MIX & MATCH.JPG
- File:KANGA SLIT.JPG
- File:KANGA.JPG
- File:KITENGE BACK SKIRT.JPG
- File:Kitenge foundation dress of a wrap top and wrap skirt accessrized with a sheer cloak.JPG
- File:KITENGE THREE PIECE.JPG
- File:Lalka Barbie - Audrey Hepburn w roli księżniczki Anny z filmu Rzymskie wakacje Williama Wylera z 1953. Muzeum Sztuk Użytkowych w Poznaniu - styczeń 2018.jpg
- File:Laurence Xu Inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:LEAF & STARS.JPG
- File:LEAF DRESS.JPG
- File:Leso one shoulder foundation dress and matching solid cloak.JPG
- File:Leso one shoulder foundation dress and sash.JPG
- File:Leso one shoulder foundation dresses.JPG
- File:Leso print bustier and skirt-back view.JPG
- File:Leso print bustier apron and skirt-front view.JPG
- File:Leso print cloak and solid foundation dress.JPG
- File:Leso under arm wraps worn with matching skirt and strapless dress repectively.JPG
- File:Leso wrap skirt and backless halter top.JPG
- File:Leso wrap skirt with solid yoke and cropped leso wrap top.JPG
- File:Leso wrap skirt, solid and leso wrap top.JPG
- File:MAASAI CROP TOP.JPG
- File:MAASAI HOUND TOOTH.JPG
- File:Maasai style wrap in leso and solid tetron.JPG
- File:Maasai style wrap of solid black and black lace.JPG
- File:Maasai style wrap of tetron and textured fabric.JPG
- File:Mistress of the Manor Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:MODERNIZED APRON.JPG
- File:MONDAY & FRIDAY.JPG
- File:Morning Sun Princess and Evening Star Princess Barbies at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:MULTI SLIT.JPG
- File:NYAYO PHILOSOPHY.JPG
- File:One shoulder dress with front overlay that falls down back.JPG
- File:Pantone Inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Parisienne Pretty Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Part kanga part tetron wrap top and tetron skirt.JPG
- File:PATY STYLE.JPG
- File:Peace and Love 70s and Benefit Ball Barbies at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:PEACOCK KANGA.JPG
- File:PINK KANGA.JPG
- File:Print kanga wrap top and solid wrap skirt with hem detail.JPG
- File:Promenade in the Park Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Provencale Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Puppe alone.jpg
- File:Queen of Hearts Bob Mackie Inspired Barbie Dolls at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Renaissance Faire Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Rest and relaxation. Priya, Honey,Andy,Tina and Isabelle at the beach.JPG
- File:Sanrio inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:SLIT APRON SKIRT & HALTER TOP.JPG
- File:SLIT APRON.JPG
- File:Spirit of the Sky and Spirit of the Water Barbies at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Star print leso wrap and halter.JPG
- File:Star print leso wrap and matching shoulder throw.JPG
- File:Star print leso wrap and shoulder throw-back view.JPG
- File:Suiting in the apron concept.JPG
- File:Sumatra Indonesia Inspired Barbies at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Sydney Opera House Inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:TAUSI CLOAK.JPG
- File:Tetron and lace apon concept.JPG
- File:Tetron wrap dress and kanga shoulder wrap.JPG
- File:TEXTURE MIX & MATCH.JPG
- File:THE MODELS.JPG
- File:The Starry Night Inspired by Vincent Van Gogh at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:THE TWO MODELS.JPG
- File:Tie and dye 2 piece foundation wrap dress.JPG
- File:TROUSER AND WRAP LESSO MIX & MATCH.JPG
- File:Victorian Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:WATER FALL.JPG
- File:Wedgwood inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:WRAP & WRAP.JPG
- File:WRAP DRESS & TRAIN.JPG
- File:Wrap dress and embroidered sash.JPG
- File:Wrap dress of kanga print right over solid tetron left.JPG
- File:Wrap top and trousers that has train attached along apron lines.JPG
- File:Wrap with train extension.JPG
— Racconish 💬 09:19, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. AshFriday (talk) 23:48, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 07:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barbie dolls
[edit]Per COM:TOYS
- File:Beauty, queen of the jungle.JPG
- File:Bustier apron dress without sash.JPG
- File:COLOUR MIX.JPG
- File:Tie and dye foundation dress and matching cloak.JPG
- File:Toys 2007-118-079 (15407001390).jpg
- File:Toys 2013-056-023b (15590189541).jpg
- File:Toys 2013-056-035d (14972104864).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
— Racconish 💬 09:48, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:20, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barbie dolls
[edit]Copyrighted 3 dimensional figure, violation of COM:TOYS.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
(Oinkers42) (talk) 15:32, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
- Keep, the image is not a violation and is used as the lead image of a major article. Go rain on some other parade. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:52, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Randy Kryn, on what basis do these pass COM:TOYS? Why do you think it's at all relevant that it's currently in use? Cakelot1 (talk) 20:04, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Obviously fails COM:TOYS. As with all the previous DRs above, these are Derivative works of a copyrighted work. Cakelot1 (talk) 20:06, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:53, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barbie dolls
[edit]Per COM:TOYS, Barbies are copyrighted by default. Excluding an advertisement that would need its own copyright notice and a few de minimis cases.
A few have tags indicating there was not copyright notice, but every box I've found from the relevant time period includes a copyright notice (for example [1] [2] [3]). It's hard to dig up the box for exact models, but the burden for that is likely on those claiming there was no copyright notice rather than the other way around.
Nominating photos from an exhibit in Italy, which does not have COM:FOP. Excluding museum exhibits in places with FOP (like those in Category:Barbie Expo), but I suspect those should be nominated, too, as temporary exhibitions rather than "permanent displays". Leaving those for someone else, though.
See also: the many other nominations on this page for the same reasons.
- File:Barbie and me.jpg
- File:Barbie e skipper con vari outfit anni '60 (coll. baldi bellavia) 01.jpg
- File:Barbie e skipper con vari outfit anni '60 (coll. baldi bellavia) 02.jpg
- File:BARBIE ON A BLACK CROSS.jpg
- File:Barbie's Operation (3284254974).jpg
- File:Black Barbie from 1980 in the box.jpg
- File:Catwoman Barbie.jpg
- File:Vintage Malibu Barbie (cropped).jpg
- File:Vintage Malibu Barbie 2 (cropped) green background.jpg
- File:Vintage Malibu Barbie 2 (cropped).jpg
- File:Vintage Malibu Barbie 2.jpg
- File:Vintage Malibu Barbie.jpg
_01.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_02.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_green_background.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
— Rhododendrites talk | 20:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Per the nominator and past DRs where the same or similar images were deleted. Not to mention at least a few of these are questionably in scope to begin with anyway. --Adamant1 (talk) 20:55, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep File:Catwoman Barbie.jpg We have been through this before with sculptures of artworks. The image is okay in Australia due to it being a free country (ie one with FoP). It is CC in the US because I took the image and licensed it as such. WMF legal has fought and won cases on this basis before. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:06, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- FOP is typically just for things situated permanently in a particular location (The exception generally applies only to works on permanent public display.). The idea is to exempt things like buildings and major public art. I'd be surprised if Australia were different in that regard, but I'd be happy to be wrong. — Rhododendrites talk | 01:49, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- I've never heard about any WMF legal battles over FoP. If you cite the case, then we can be edified by the details, the arguments, and the resolution.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:32, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete both for the obvious reasons and because it would indirectly kill the ridiculous debate currently going on at w:talk:Barbenheimer Dronebogus (talk) 14:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- In my experience, exporting disputes from enwp to Commons is unhelpful, and might even push annoyed Commons admins to lend more credibility to the other side. If you opt to remove that part of your comment, you're welcome to remove this response, too. — Rhododendrites talk | 15:49, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep the image being used on Barbenheimer for page relevance and out-of-copyright information on the image page. Please do not remove the comment above (you can strike words out) as an example of bias pertaining to the RfC. Randy Kryn (talk) 05:36, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Randy Kryn, as you did in the last vote, you've used the argument that the image shouldn't be deleted because it's in use. But that's completely besides the point since we don't keep copyright violating works just because they are used. The argument is that the "out-of-copyright information" is incorrect, and you have not engaged with those arguments made in the nom. Cakelot1 (talk) 07:13, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per the well argued nom. It is possible that some of these are public domain but without evidence (and per COM:PRP) we can't keep them based on a possibility Cakelot1 (talk) 07:16, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- At least think out of the box and leave the image that's on the Barbenheimer page alone. You don't think if Mattel wanted it taken down they would have contacted someone? The page has had 1.4 million plus views since a photo of Barbie has been up-front, and of those views I would think that the Mattel company, its attorneys, its law clerks, its board of directors, and its secretaries would have clicked on the page and know that one of their dolls is being featured. They all know it, yet nobody got on the horn or filed a complaint. Mattel is perfectly happy having it up there! That's obvious, and because the copyright is still being questioned, and literally nobody cares to legally contest its use, at least leave it until this unique film-combination period moves along a bit and the page goes back to normal viewing. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:27, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- "Nobody has complained yet" isn't a reason for keeping anything. Images on Commons must be usable and modifiable by anyone for any purpose. Our policies are in place to protect not just Wikipedia, but everyone who uses the content. If someone would be opening themselves up to litigation by taking our Barbie photos, putting them in a book or on a poster, and selling them, we cannot host it. People need to know when they go to Commons that the license is reliable. "But it's used in an article" is irrelevant. If you would like it to be used in an article and not hosted on Commons, that's what en:WP:NFCC is for (for local uploads to Wikipedia). There's probably a good case for NFCC when it comes to the main Barbie article. — Rhododendrites talk | 22:51, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- That makes sense. Would you or someone please add the Vintage Barbie 2 cropped to the Wikipedia files (The one being used on Barhenheimer now)? I'm not computer savvy enough to add it and yes, the Barbie page could argue for it for sure and the Barbenheimer page could have a good case. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:06, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- I don't there's much chance you'd get an WP:NFCC Rationale for the Barhenheimer page. As to the main Barbie page Wikipedia would probably want a clearer and up to date image than "Vintage Barbie". Best to leave it until/if this deletion happens. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 07:07, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- ^^ If you're going the en:WP:NFCC route, you can pick an ideal photo (like one from an official Mattel website, even), then just upload it locally to wikipedia and follow the prompts to explain why it qualifies for NFCC. Actually, it looks like the main Barbie article already has a couple non-free images: en:File:MattelBarbieno1br.jpg and en:File:Oreo Fun Barbie.jpg. If you wanted to upload another one, you could use the templates on those pages as a template. — Rhododendrites talk | 13:31, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- Can't do uploads on my computer, which is why I asked. The image used on Barbenheimer fits that page well and serves as a counterpoint to an image of Oppenheimer within a double-image. The reasoning for its use at Barbenheimer would be as representative of the portrayed character per the use of the Oppenheimer image. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:43, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Randy Kryn, it "fitting" or looking good isn't enough to get for WP:NFCC unfortunately. Even in the main barbie article I can't think of any non-free justification (the section doesn't say anything about the barbie in question). representative of the portrayed character, simply isn't a strong enough reason. And non of this is a reason for keeping it on commons, which is what we are discussing here. (I have the original flikr upload bookmarked so if there is suddenly an extremely good WP:NFC based reason I can always upload it to wp, although this sort of discussion should really be happening at w:Talk:Barbenheimer) Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 22:18, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
- Can't do uploads on my computer, which is why I asked. The image used on Barbenheimer fits that page well and serves as a counterpoint to an image of Oppenheimer within a double-image. The reasoning for its use at Barbenheimer would be as representative of the portrayed character per the use of the Oppenheimer image. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:43, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- ^^ If you're going the en:WP:NFCC route, you can pick an ideal photo (like one from an official Mattel website, even), then just upload it locally to wikipedia and follow the prompts to explain why it qualifies for NFCC. Actually, it looks like the main Barbie article already has a couple non-free images: en:File:MattelBarbieno1br.jpg and en:File:Oreo Fun Barbie.jpg. If you wanted to upload another one, you could use the templates on those pages as a template. — Rhododendrites talk | 13:31, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- I don't there's much chance you'd get an WP:NFCC Rationale for the Barhenheimer page. As to the main Barbie page Wikipedia would probably want a clearer and up to date image than "Vintage Barbie". Best to leave it until/if this deletion happens. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 07:07, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- That makes sense. Would you or someone please add the Vintage Barbie 2 cropped to the Wikipedia files (The one being used on Barhenheimer now)? I'm not computer savvy enough to add it and yes, the Barbie page could argue for it for sure and the Barbenheimer page could have a good case. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:06, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment FYI, this and this. Nyxaros (talk) 20:10, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
- As the nom noted there doesn't seem to be any evidence of Pd-no-notice, and non was provided in those DRs. The user asserting no-notice doesn't seem to be the photographer so it doesn't seem wise to take that without evidence. Mdaniels5757 (and the closer IronGargoyle), if there's some obvious evidence of there not being a copyright notice on this particular barbie (when others at the time had them), it would be much appreciated if you could point it out. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 09:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom, we'd need evidence of no copyright notice on the original boxes to justify keeping the images. Di (they-them) (talk) 23:55, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Barbie on a black cross as transformative and de minimis. The rest are probably unjustifiable, unfortunately. David Eppstein (talk) 20:39, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry, but whether it's transformative is a consideration of fair use, which Commons doesn't accept, and the doll is the focal point (and title) of the image. — Rhododendrites talk | 02:50, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment - I already nominated one of the files for deletion here Commons:Deletion requests/File:Black Barbie from 1980 in the box.jpg. Should I request that DR to be closed for this one? (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:14, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 06:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Abou Bakr khalefa (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal photos for non-wikipedian - out of scope
- File:حسين ابو خليفه.jpg
- File:ابو محمد.jpg
- File:ابو حسين.jpg
- File:حسين خليفه.jpg
- File:انجي .jpg
- File:علاء بهيج.jpg
- File:المهندس علاء بهيج .jpg
- File:احمد وانجي .jpg
- File:المهندس.jpg
- File:عيسي.jpg
- File:محمد بكر.jpg
- File:ال خليفه.jpg
- File:بكر.jpg
- File:المرحوم.jpg
- File:ابوبكر الخليفه.jpg
- File:الراحل ابوبكر حسين.jpg
- File:المرحوم ابوبكر وابنه.jpg
- File:ابوبكر خليفه.jpg
--Alaa :)..! 11:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:27, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Abou Bakr khalefa (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal photos for non-wikipedian - out of scope
--Alaa :)..! 10:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:01, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Dubious own-work claims. User has a history of copyright violation and continues to do so. Their own-work claims cannot be taken at face value.
- File:کیریش خانه در روستای اق گنبد.jpg
- File:عکس قدیمی از مدرسه راهنمایی روستای اق گنبد.jpg
- File:نمای زیبای کوه ودره های آق گنبد.jpg
- File:آبشار آغیل دره سی در آق گنبد.jpg
- File:بولاق گولو در آق گنبد.jpg
- File:منطقه گوزلو درآق گنبد.jpg
- File:نمای قلعه هلاکوخان در برف در روستای آق گنبد.jpg
- File:کیچی باغ درروستای آق گنبد.jpg
- File:چیچیخ باغ درروستای اق گنبد.jpg
- File:دکتر رحمان پور.jpg
- File:دریاچه ارومیه 22.jpg
- File:دریاچه ارومیه2.jpg
- File:اورمو گولی.jpg
- File:دریاچه ارومیه.jpg
4nn1l2 (talk) 12:16, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:34, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:Hgjnmhgjn.jpg
- File:F, jhmn ,gh.jpg
- File:Ільківна.jpg
- File:Стопчак.jpg
- File:Зубрицька.jpg
- File:ПпНПНПОРПНОГП16196.jpg
- File:Switlana.jpg
- File:Світлана Шептуха.jpg
- File:Ольга Мартиновська.jpg
- File:Лілія Студницька.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:39, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:39, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Chattan Kumar Kishan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Commons is not a photo album. Out of scope.
- File:Ramkot beshi swimming.jpg
- File:With tv.jpg
- File:Viceroy Hotel.jpg
- File:W hotel Abu Dhabi Deluxe.jpg
- File:Chattan visit Iran.jpg
Minoraxtalk (formerly 大诺史) 15:46, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:35, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused personal photo. Uploader requests.
- File:野氷清太のターバン1.jpg
- File:Nokoorigraduation-1.jpg
- File:FNR6646-nokoori.jpg
- File:FNR6635-nokoori.jpg
N219 (talk) 18:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:49, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Hamani abdelatif 94 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
- File:FB IMG 1587370203027gg.jpg
- File:FB IMG 1587370190074cbb.jpg
- File:FB IMG 1587370205660qwer.jpg
- File:FB IMG 1588600126769gg.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:20, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 09:46, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Promo photos and album covers. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:Trúc Tiên 2019A.jpg
- File:Trúc Tiên 2019B.jpg
- File:Trúc Tiên 2019C.jpg
- File:Trúc Tiên 2017.jpg
- File:CD Thuong.jpg
- File:CD Kieu.jpg
- File:CD DA.jpg
- File:CD LVT.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Les pochettes de CD sont à supprimer, je suis d'accord, désolée je ne savais pas. Mais les portraits de cet artiste, pourquoi doit-on les supprimer ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Touchine (talk • contribs) 15:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 09:48, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:24, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 09:49, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Juhili Debbarma.jpg
- File:Parmita Reang.jpg
- File:R.C Debbarma distributing auto-trucks.jpg
- File:Mandy Debbarma.jpg
- File:Pravat chowdhury.jpg
- File:Boyar.jpg
- File:Radha Charan Debbarma.jpg
- File:Manik dey.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:27, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 10:17, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 10:17, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- File:New flag of South Azerbaijan.svg
- File:New flag of South Azerbaijan.png
- File:Which flag is the flag of South Azerbaijan.png
According to this article in English wikipedia (of course I know that Wikipedia is not reliable source), the Flag of South Azerbaijan proposed by South Azerbaijan National Party. But I've never heard this party's name. I reserched it. According to facebook :))), South Azerbaijan National Party (Güney Azərbaycan Milli Partısı) is a political party that founded by Meysem Atael in 2011. Atael's website. This person is not notable. (Atael in google only 67 results, Meysem = User:Mahdipur) and probably its activities are made by internet. Furthermore, there is no evidence to prove that this party proposed this flag. I believe Wikipedia must not be used for the purpose of propaganda and advertisement (of course Wikipedia prohibit it). Takabeg (talk) 06:34, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- I would support the deletion of File:New flag of South Azerbaijan.png for being an orphan that is replaced by a SVG file (and on the PNG file there are issues with the rotation of certain elements that have been fixed by the SVG file). I would keep File:Which flag is the flag of South Azerbaijan.png because it gives a compilation of proposed flags and helps someone like me figure out what is going on with this flag. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:46, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
1. This is the flag of Southern Azerbaijan National Awakening Movement. As long as I know, they don't propose this flag as a common flag of South Azerbaijan. I think we have to change file name. I guess that this user added {{Fictitious flag}} tag only because of its name.
2. This is the flag of the South Azerbaijan Independence Party (GAİP). Both of File:Gaip.gif and File:Azerbaycan.jpg are not accurate. At least, this party assumes (not a concrete proposal) their own flag as a common flag of South Azerbaijan.
3. File:Flag of South Azerbaijan.svg, File:New flag of South Azerbaijan.svg, File:New flag of South Azerbaijan.png are out of question.
4. We can understand this "dispute" is also fictitious. I think same user forged such dispute. This discussion may help other users.
Takabeg (talk) 00:31, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
- I'll fix the GAIP flag, give me a few minutes. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:34, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: All except the last one. FASTILY (TALK) 11:44, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Нет источника 109.252.23.174 03:57, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. Sources - Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization, Official site of Southern Azerbaijan National Awakening Movement, Musavat.com, Teleqraf.com.--Nicat49 (talk) 01:03, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep the dabate was once closed. Now user Nicat49 added quite respectful sources, which means the flag should not be deleted.--Toghrul Rahimli (talk) 05:18, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep--Neriman2003 (talk) 08:52, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep--Anar Məmmədov (talk) 11:56, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. per above Nicat49. --►Cekli829 06:23, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep --Namikilisu (talk) 14:03, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep there is no valid reason for deletion. Best --Mehman 97 15:12, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep The image is not breaching any copyright laws.--Azerifactory (talk) 16:35, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 12:03, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Out of scope fictitious flag Aztap (talk) 00:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Again, there is no valid reason for deletion. --Mehman 97 11:43, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Aztap: Commons:Project scope#File in use in another Wikimedia project:
- A media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful for an educational purpose
- This file is in use. In fact, it is in use on so many pages that the file description page only lists some of them. Hence, in scope. Hence:
Speedy keep Brianjd (talk) 13:37, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: The image (the flag of South Azerbaijan) is in use. Therefore, the elimination proposal is not supported by the specific rule (COM:SCOPE), and the file will be kept. --Érico (talk) 14:32, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Two friends: In scope? E4024 (talk) 00:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:33, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Not a real user, is he? 7 global contributions in almost a decade E4024 (talk) 00:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:33, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Not a significant user. Made a couple of edits in EN:WP only. E4024 (talk) 01:33, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- + FBMD. --E4024 (talk) 01:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:34, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Per COM:SELFIE BriefEdits (talk) 05:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep Illustrative high quality portrait, the colour palette appears to be set up for print rather than screen. Fæ (talk) 07:09, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Hey, Fæ, I'm still unsure where this photo fits within COM:SCOPE. It's a high-resolution photo, sure, but at the moment, it appears to fall under COM:NOTUSED. Thanks for commenting. Looking forward to your feedback. - BriefEdits (talk) 01:57, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- Potentially illustrative = "realistic utility", so it's deliberately a low bar. Fæ (talk) 03:17, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Hey, Fæ, I do not understand what you mean when you said that the "palette appears to be set up for print rather than screen" and how that might be "potentially illustrative". Like how it might be illustrative of Lightroom editing? I'm not quite following. If you could perhaps offer up another example, that would be appreciated. - BriefEdits (talk) 05:01, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- Potentially illustrative = "realistic utility", so it's deliberately a low bar. Fæ (talk) 03:17, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- These are two separate things. The image is potentially useful for illustration. On my monitor, I see a slight lightening overcast which dulls the photo, this is an effect I normally see when the image has been optimized for printing rather than display on a monitor.
- Someone may be tempted to enhance the saturation to give a better display, but this would best be created as a new file. Fæ (talk) 08:09, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Hey, Fæ, guess I don't see the usefulness of this extremely marginal utility, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. - BriefEdits (talk) 05:28, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Unknown person, file not in use, without educational purpose = deleted. I also don't see any "potential use." Érico (talk) 14:38, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Rubbish - no use at all S a g a C i t y (talk) 05:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete: Obvious COM:SPAM. - BriefEdits (talk) 06:05, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:40, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
no useful description, unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:40, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:41, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:41, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of project scope due to small size and bad quality. Taivo (talk) 09:33, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:41, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 14:35, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:42, 11 June 2020 (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) 14:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:42, 11 June 2020 (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) 14:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial book cover of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:02, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:08, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:09, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram of questionable notability. Should be in SVG and w:en:Help:Table if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:11, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:11, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:13, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:21, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:24, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:25, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Used in unapproved draft. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:32, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:33, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sagarshindetalk (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:35, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Hichem Deghmoum (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:37, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private drawing album. Used in unapproved draft. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:38, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Thejoeeley (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:41, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by RichaLifeCares (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
- File:Jasmin pic.jpg
- File:MV5BMWExNzYxZDAtNTdhMS00YmE4LWJlZDMtYmRkOGJkMTUwZGEwXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNzM4MjU3NzY@. V1 SY1000 CR0,0,648,1000 AL .jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:43, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by ياسر مصطفى المصري (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:44, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:16, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:45, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
unused and uncategorised file. Commons is not private media repository. Only (remaining) uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 16:17, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:45, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Again a low-re image of a celebrity: unlikely to be own work. Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:17, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:46, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 16:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:46, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of project scope: not an educational photo. unused photo. N219 (talk) 18:15, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:49, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Unused suspicious personal photo, out of project Sakhalinio (talk) 20:23, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- include
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:49, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 20:25, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of project Sakhalinio (talk) 20:27, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of project Sakhalinio (talk) 20:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 20:46, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of project Sakhalinio (talk) 20:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 20:53, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
bad quality, unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 20:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
blurry, unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 20:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Per COM:SELFIE BriefEdits (talk) 21:53, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:47, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of scope Lucasnotad (talk) 22:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:47, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of scope Lucasnotad (talk) 22:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:47, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Unused OoS personal file. E4024 (talk) 23:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:46, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Small and opaque non-white background. It's so small that some key chemical details, such as teh negative sign on one O of each S is almost invisible. Have File:Indigo carmine.svg as high-quality replacement. DMacks (talk) 02:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Extremely poor-quality chemical structure in small resolution, coloured atom labels & opaque background. Also remember to delete the old file redirect File:Imgsrv.png. Chem Sim 2001 (disc) 22:09, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Leyo 21:15, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Unused and inappropriate file format. There is more better version, File:The World of the Carboniferous-Permian boundary.svg SMB99thx (talk) 02:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination, after my edit got reverted on Azerbaijani Wikipedia. In my opinion, this image is terrible. But, with that edit got reverted i'm reconsidering this deletion request - this image should stay since it belongs to the Azerbaijani Wikipedia. SMB99thx (talk) 07:12, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per withdrawn nomination and COM:INUSE. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:03, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
I am the author and uploader of this file. This was uploaded here by mistake. Please remove this file as per my request. Satpal (CIS-A2K) (talk) 03:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:35, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
I am the author and uploader of this file. This was uploaded here by mistake. Please remove this file as per my request. Satpal Dandiwal (talk) 04:25, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close (already deleted, double nomination). --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:04, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Copyrighted music album cover: This one is not published under a free Creative Commons license. Sorry, but you may upload it under a local Wiki where fair use images are allowed. Mosbatho (talk) 08:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:05, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Unused doctored photo of tree without meaningful description. No eduicational value. Malcolma (talk) 10:48, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:05, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
No indication in the source that the file is available under a free licence. The user was asked about it (and another 2 similar images) on his talk page in early April, without any answer. Schutz (talk) 13:10, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:06, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Map coming from a newspaper, with no indication that it is under a free licence. The user was asked about it (and another 2 similar images) on his talk page in early April, without any answer. Schutz (talk) 13:11, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:06, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
out of scope - selfie, slighty out of focus Mindmatrix 13:41, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:10, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:05, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete I found the image on the subject's facebook page. The uploader has uploaded a number of other non-free images and re-uploaded them after they were deleted as copyvios. --AussieLegend (✉) 16:09, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: already deleted. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:10, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
This is a private file that should not be uploaded on Commons. For the sake of my safety, I want to remove it from the Commons. N219 (talk) 17:47, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: was already deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by N219. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:11, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photo. N219 (talk) 18:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: was already deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by N219. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:12, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
This is a private file that should not be uploaded on Commons. For the sake of my safety, I want to remove it from the Commons. N219 (talk) 17:51, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: was already deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by N219. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:12, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photo. N219 (talk) 18:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: was already deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by N219. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:12, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
This is a private file that should not be uploaded on Commons. For the sake of my safety, I want to remove it from the Commons. N219 (talk) 17:53, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: was already deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by N219. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:12, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photo. N219 (talk) 18:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: was already deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by N219. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:12, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
This is a private file that should not be uploaded on Commons. For the sake of my safety, I want to remove it from the Commons. N219 (talk) 17:53, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: was already deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by N219. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:12, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal photo. N219 (talk) 18:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: was already deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by N219. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:13, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope personal image. E4024 (talk) 23:55, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --1989 (talk) 07:55, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
UPF and OoS pics of a youngster who could well use a short term Commons vacation. E4024 (talk) 15:08, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --1989 (talk) 09:55, 27 April 2019 (UTC)
Repetition of deleted OoS files. E4024 (talk) 18:13, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: was already deleted. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:13, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Has been uploaded and deleted several previous times. Unused image of non-contributer to Commons. Rodhullandemu (talk) 19:06, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
- Comment simply adding File:Farhan Rana Rajpoot Signature.jpg to the deletion request, it is the uploader's signature -Nutshinou Talk! 19:46, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Deleted both. Uploader is globally locked. I tagged 4 sockpuppets. Taivo (talk) 07:57, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Has been uploaded and deleted several previous times. Here only to self-promote. Rodhullandemu (talk) 17:18, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deleted by Fitindia. -- CptViraj (talk) 15:00, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
- File:WikiCEE Meeting2017 day0 -42.jpg
- File:WikiCEE Meeting2017 day0 -43.jpg
- File:WikiCEE Meeting2017 day0 -44.jpg
- File:WikiCEE Meeting2017 day0 -46.jpg
- File:WikiCEE Meeting2017 day0 -47.jpg
- File:WikiCEE Meeting2017 day0 -61.jpg
- File:WikiCEE Meeting2017 day0 -70.jpg
- File:WikiCEE Meeting2017 day0 -71.jpg
- File:WikiCEE Meeting2017 day0 -72.jpg
- File:WikiCEE Meeting2017 day0 -97.jpg
- File:WikiCEE Meeting2017 day0 -98.jpg
- File:WikiCEE Meeting2017 day0 -99.jpg
Yuraily Lic (talk) 12:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Fitindia (talk) 09:15, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Montxohache (talk · contribs)
[edit]File type, quality and EXIF suggest these images are video screenshots, not original work.
- File:Demba Bamba.png
- File:Romain Ntamack.png
- File:Lucas Pointud.png
- File:Jon Zabala.png
- File:Charles Ollivon.jpg
- File:Baptiste chouzenoux.png
Ytoyoda (talk) 02:51, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 07:46, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Montxohache (talk · contribs)
[edit]Appear to be screenshots/photographs of a screen, not own work
- File:Nepo Laulala RWC2019.jpg
- File:Kieran Read RWC2019.jpg
- File:George Ford RWC2019.jpg
- File:Codie Taylor RWC2019.jpg
- File:Ben Youngs RWC2019.jpg
- File:Aaron Smith RWC2019.jpg
- File:Maro Itoje RWC2019.jpg
- File:Sam Whitelock RWC2019.jpg
Ytoyoda (talk) 13:02, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Fitindia (talk) 09:16, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
File has an FBMD in the metadata, and has matching results in Google Images. This is probably not photographed by the uploader, but someone else. pandakekok9 02:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
No evidence of PD; "unknown photographer" is not a valid rationale Vahurzpu (talk) 04:19, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
I am the author and uploader of this file. This was uploaded here by mistake. Please remove this file as per my request. Satpal Dandiwal (talk) 04:26, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Rubbish - presunably meant as a joke S a g a C i t y (talk) 05:24, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
• Delete: Per COM:SELFIE and COM:SPAM. Description is obviously a joke. - BriefEdits (talk) 06:04, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Derivative work of non-free content (F3) Batholith (talk) 10:09, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yasu (talk) 15:42, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Derivative work of non-free content (F3) Batholith (talk) 10:10, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yasu (talk) 15:42, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Derivative work of non-free content (F3) Batholith (talk) 10:21, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yasu (talk) 15:42, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Derivative work of non-free content (F3) Batholith (talk) 10:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Non-free explanation board. COM:FOP Japan (Template:NoFoP-Japan) --Batholith (talk) 14:56, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yasu (talk) 15:44, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Derivative work of non-free content (F3) Batholith (talk) 10:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Non-free explanation board. COM:FOP Japan (Template:NoFoP-Japan) --Batholith (talk) 14:55, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yasu (talk) 15:44, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
File:NBnauM3XzQjNxAzNycTN1AjM2MTM1ATMxETOzIzMwAzMxAzL3UzLzUzLt92YucmbvRWdo5Cd0FmLzE2LvoDc0RHa.jpg
[edit]
Non-free copyright. See w:yue:Wikipedia:版權問題#File:NBnauM3XzQjNxAzNycTN1AjM2MTM1ATMxETOzIzMwAzMxAzL3UzLzUzLt92YucmbvRWdo5Cd0FmLzE2LvoDc0RHa.jpg Deryck Chan (talk) 14:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 17:35, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Рахметоллаева Мейрамгүл (talk · contribs)
[edit]not own work. OTRS-permission is needed. Compare eg en:File:Roxette The Ballad Hits.jpg
Estopedist1 (talk) 07:12, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:26, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
own work? No useful description, unused, uncategorized. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:24, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:26, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Again a low-re image of a celebrity: unlikely to be own work. Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:15, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:26, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. The only uploading by this user. Do we need more context here? Estopedist1 (talk) 16:15, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:26, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
copyvio, shows contemporary artwork and bookcovers, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:16, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:26, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
copyvio, shows contemporary artwork and bookcovers, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:16, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:26, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mbarnes2020 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Uploader claims credit for the photo, but does not appear to be the person credited in the metadata. The photo was previously published at https://hurricanesports.com/news/2019/6/14/womens-basketball-meier-receives-contract-extension-through-2024-25.aspx and requires an OTRS ticket.
Ytoyoda (talk) 12:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 12:01, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:02, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 12:01, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Shishpal giri (talk · contribs)
[edit]low quality vanity photo, no encyclopedic or other value.
Praxidicae (talk) 14:18, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 12:01, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by MagisterCorvus123 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Collages of a random college class. No encyclopedic value.
Gikü (talk) 16:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 12:02, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Wikimedia Cuteness Association delegates at Wikimedia Diversity Conference 2017
[edit]- File:2 Wiki cutties in Stockholm.jpg
- File:2017-11-04 Stockholm, Diversity Conference, Cuteness Assosication (01) (freddy2001).jpg
- File:3 Wiki cutties in Stockholm.jpg
- File:Wiki cutties in Stockholm.jpg
- File:WikiDivCon 2017, Nov 4, 2017 38.jpg
- File:WikiDivCon 2017, Nov 4, 2017 39.jpg
- File:WikiDivCon 2017, Nov 4, 2017 40.jpg
- File:WikiDivCon 2017, Nov 4, 2017 49.jpg
- File:WikiDivCon 2017, Nov 4, 2017 50.jpg
- File:WikiDivCon 2017, Nov 4, 2017 51.jpg
_(freddy2001).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Yuraily Lic (talk) 12:41, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 15:29, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:57, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 01:36, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Unidentified butterfly, low quality photograph, orphaned, inappropriate file type. Leyo 14:10, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 01:37, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
obviously not own work (signature on the photo is different from the uploader) LeFnake (talk) 14:27, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 01:38, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Copyvio. Cropped version of http://www.irismonument.be/fr.Bruxelles_Extension_Est.Rue_des_Eburons.52.html#&gid=1&pid=1 which states "reproduction allowed under conditions" Henxter (talk) 14:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 01:37, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
These files look like it wasn't taken in 2020 (probably taken somewhere in 1972). The copyright status of these files must be clarified.
pandakekok9 02:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Deleted already. --E4024 (talk) 02:05, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Uploader's request: photo of identifiable person Muhraz (talk) 15:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 02:22, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Uploader's request: privay reasons Muhraz (talk) 15:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 02:22, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
copyvio, artist died in 1968, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:24, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Agreed - delete-- Danke für den Hinweis, das wusste ich nicht. Dietrich Krieger (talk) 18:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 02:25, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
copyvio, artist of stained glass windows died in 1968, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:26, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Agreed - delete-- Danke für den Hinweis, das wusste ich nicht. Dietrich Krieger (talk) 18:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 02:26, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
_(8).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
copyvio, artist of stained glass windows died in 1968, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:27, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
_(8).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 02:26, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
_(8).jpg){kind=link}
copyvio, artist of stained glass windows died in 11968, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 02:26, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
copyvio, artist of stained glass windows died in 1968, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Agreed - delete-- Danke für den Hinweis, das wusste ich nicht. Dietrich Krieger (talk) 19:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 02:26, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
copyvio, artist of stained glass windows died in 1968, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:32, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Agreed - delete-- Danke für den Hinweis, das wusste ich nicht. Dietrich Krieger (talk) 19:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 02:26, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Also:
COM:NOTHOST - unused, low quality image of uploader's cat (per description) Эlcobbola talk 18:44, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 02:23, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
obviously not the uploader's own work: https://www.google.com/search?safe=active&tbs=simg:CAQSrAIJhW9qAGvkH2QaoAILELCMpwgaYgpgCAMSKIEagBrtD8Yash-NH4sfjh-lGpAfhjHJMcox3CX0MIUxhzHqJf8w-jsaMAENZFb-QpQhC8IskJ8FL7J5lLRQUYlBbydlAqTntFunONwuZUjQ8Tjrz4Aa9fGb8yAEDAsQjq7-CBoKCggIARIEOgcI7wwLEJ3twQkamAEKFwoEZ2lybNqliPYDCwoJL20vMDVyNjU1CicKFHBvcnRyYWl0IHBob3RvZ3JhcGh52qWI9gMLCgkvbS8wY2htbDkKHwoLcGhvdG8gc2hvb3TapYj2AwwKCi9tLzAycWJsMW0KGAoFYmxvbmTapYj2AwsKCS9tLzAyOTRqYgoZCgV3b21hbtqliPYDDAoKL20vMDNidDF2Zgw&sxsrf=ALeKk03_KlSb2Ev54si-SDbDjtJeKIHpFw:1591210602825&q=rachel+hurd+wood&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiU1vm1qebpAhVlU98KHZy8D5EQ2A4oAXoECB0QKQ&cshid=1591210623385745&biw=1464&bih=867 Ytoyoda (talk) 18:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 02:27, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Highly unlikely to be user's own work. Reliability further questionable. Aman.kumar.goel (talk) 19:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete I agree, that's an unlikely shot for a spectator at an airshow, and I doubt an Iranian government or media photographer would upload their own photo to WC. - ZLEA T\C 21:51, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --ƏXPLICIT 02:28, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Because of the copyrights ONFILM (talk) 19:33, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: EXIF data shows "BETHANY VARGAS" as author. --ƏXPLICIT 02:28, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Copyrighted image Clodion (talk) 12:32, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:03, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
JR Anil Jain (Inventor of Jain Reflexology) but the file looks a bit DW. E4024 (talk) 00:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 13:06, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
File:A 'His Name is George Floyd' sign along 38th St in Minneapolis on Wednesday, after the death of George Floyd on Monday night in Minneapolis, Minnesota (49943511911).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 02:15, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per Commons:De minimis. The 2D art doesn't take up most of the photo. Kingofthedead (talk) 05:50, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; the artwork is the focus of the photo, the rest is blurred to the point of being unusable on its own. --Gbawden (talk) 13:06, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Alextherandomdude (talk · contribs)
[edit]Изображения взяты из сети (https://www.zr.ru/content/articles/403462-moskvich-433_ot_sezda_do_bufeta/ например) и нелегально выложены с присвоением авторских прав
- File:Model-moskvich-433.jpg
- File:Moskvic-433 4.jpg
- File:Moskvich-433wiki1.jpg
- File:Izh-kombiwiki.jpg
- File:Ladawiki1.jpg
- File:Moskvitch-434. wikipedia.jpg
- File:Model-moskvich-434.jpg
- File:Moskvichwiki2.jpg
- File:Moskvichwiki.jpg
Barbarian (talk) 08:47, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 13:10, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
- File:Ella and Isabella together at Wikimania 2018 01.jpg
- File:Ella and Isabella together at Wikimania 2018 02.jpg
- File:Ella and Isabella together at Wikimania 2018 03.jpg
- File:Ella at Diversity Working Group meeting at Wikimania 2018.jpg
Yuraily Lic (talk) 21:56, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 11:57, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
- File:Cuties group photo wikimania 2018-1.jpg
- File:Cuties group photo wikimania 2018-2.jpg
- File:Cuties group photo wikimania 2018-3.jpg
Yuraily Lic (talk) 22:00, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 11:57, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
- File:Helpdesk for new editors-2 wikimania 2018.jpg
- File:MJK 26446 Wikimedia Cuteness Association (Wikimania 2018).jpg
- File:MJK 26450 Wikimedia Cuteness Association (Wikimania 2018).jpg
- File:Plushies at wikimania 2018.jpg
- File:Wikimania 2018 - Group photo plushies & General Assembly Wikimedia Cuteness Association (1).jpg
- File:Wikimania 2018 - Group photo plushies & General Assembly Wikimedia Cuteness Association (2).jpg
- File:Wikimania 2018 - Group photo plushies & General Assembly Wikimedia Cuteness Association (3).jpg
- File:Wikimania 2018 20180722 171325 (11).jpg
- File:Wikimania 2018 20180722 171325 (12).jpg
- File:Wikimania 2018 20180722 171325 (9).jpg
- File:Wikimania 2018 by Nirmal Dulal (16).jpg
- File:Wikimania099.jpg
- File:Wikimania100.jpg
- File:Wikimedia Cuteness Association at Wikimania 2018 (1).jpg
- File:Wikimedia Cuteness Association at Wikimania 2018 (5).jpg
- File:Wikimedia Cuteness Association representatives at Wikimania 2018.jpg
- File:Zelena & Robin at Wikimania 2018.jpg
- File:Zelena & Robin in Love at Wikimania 2018.jpg
- File:Zelena the Bulgarian Frog at Wikimania 2018 (02).jpg
- File:Zelena the Bulgarian Frog at Wikimania 2018 (03).jpg
- File:Zelena the Bulgarian Frog at Wikimania 2018 (04).jpg
- File:Zelena the Bulgarian Frog at Wikimania 2018.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Yuraily Lic (talk) 12:57, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep ich kann da nirgendwo etwas Geschütztes erkennen. Diese Paranoia hinsichtlich Spielzeug ist nicht nachvollziehbar. --Ralf Roletschek 13:02, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- To give an example, there is a light brown bear toy in File:Wikimania 2018 - Group photo plushies & General Assembly Wikimedia Cuteness Association (1).jpg. It is a toy of Rilakkuma, obviously copyrighted. So, these files should be deleted as COM:TOYS. --Yuraily Lic (talk) 12:59, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- COM:TOYS ist Quatsch. --Ralf Roletschek 14:12, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 13:09, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Requested via OTRS by the depicted person + the media is not used an maybe even out of project scope. AntonierCH (d) 13:45, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 13:05, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
не хочу размещать Андрей Олешко (talk) 14:47, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Courtesy deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 13:08, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Uploader's request: privay reasons Muhraz (talk) 15:51, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Ankry at 15:04, 19 August 2020 UTC: Author or uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content (G7): Commons:Deletion requests/File:WikiJamaah 24 May 2019.jpg: Uploader's request: privay reasons --Krdbot 01:21, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Uploader's request: privay reasons Muhraz (talk) 15:51, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Ankry at 15:04, 19 August 2020 UTC: Author or uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content (G7): Commons:Deletion requests/File:WikiLatih Papua 1.jpg: Uploader's request: privay reasons --Krdbot 01:21, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Uploader's request: privay reasons Muhraz (talk) 15:51, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Ankry at 15:01, 19 August 2020 UTC: Author or uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content (G7): Commons:Deletion requests/File:WikiLatih Papua 2.jpg: Uploader's request: privay reasons --Krdbot 01:21, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Uploader's request: privacy reasons Muhraz (talk) 16:39, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Ankry at 15:02, 19 August 2020 UTC: Author or uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content (G7): Commons:Deletion requests/File:Indonesian Wikipedian at LangCamp.jpg: Uploader's request: privacy reasons --Krdbot 01:21, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
Invalid copyright rationale: just because it's a school song doesn't make it public domain. Vahurzpu (talk) 05:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:30, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
COM:DW 85.212.98.49 06:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
![06:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2020/06/03#c-85.212.98.49-2020-06-03T06:40:00.000Z-File:Scars_from_different_"abductees".jpg){kind=link}
Kept: No reason to doubt that uploader is the original film photographer. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
![14:31, 25 August 2020 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2020/06/03#c-King_of_Hearts-2020-08-25T14:31:00.000Z-File:Scars_from_different_"abductees".jpg){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Uğurkent as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://www.trybeweb.com.ng/2020/05/update-widows-driver.html Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr. 06:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:32, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
This photograph is surely a valuable contribution for Wikimedia but I doubt that is freely available under the Creative Commons license that is given on the Commons-page. Here is an internet image of comparable size and resolution. As such it is also doubtful that it is "own work". Mosbatho (talk) 08:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:32, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Per COM:TOYS, OTRS-permission from toymaker is needed. Taivo (talk) 08:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:33, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Sorry but this one seems not to be the uploader's own work: much higher resolution available on the web and TinEye gives several search results as well. I assume this image must get deleted dui to copyright issues because there is no certain proof that this image has been published under a free CC license. Mosbatho (talk) 09:15, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:34, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Small photo without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. I suspect not own work, but copyright violation. Nonsense description, no categories, even country is unknown. That way the photo is out of project scope as well. Taivo (talk) 09:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:33, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative work of non-free content (F3) Batholith (talk) 10:35, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep As with other photos in Category:Photographs of maps of the world, It is a very ordinary world map. --Benzoyl (talk) 21:23, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep as above.ReiwaawieR (talk) 00:36, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Simple copyright violation. --Fæ (talk) 10:24, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
- Unknown publish date. --Batholith (talk) 12:34, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete COM:DW and COM:URAA. Published in maybe 1950s. [1] --eien20 (talk) 14:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
References
- ↑ 赤道アフリカ (AEF) existed from 1910 to 1959, ローデシア・ニヤサランド連邦 (CAF) existed from 1953 to 1963, 南アフリカ連邦 (Union of South Africa) existed from 1910 to 1960
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:35, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Delete Probable copyright infringment. The photo is identical to that one at Yannis Livadas' personal blog. ǁ ǁǁǁ Chalk19 (talk) 11:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- PS. Considering:
- That user Adratiatic20 is almost without any doubt the latest of the sockpuppet accounts of Yannis Livadas (see my report @ el/WP Admin. N/B el:ΒΠ:ΣΔ#SPAs ή/και μαριονέτες που προωθούν συγκεκριμένο πρόσωπο στη ΒΠ (= on SPAs and socks promoting Y. Livadas in WP)
- The file metadata of this photograph (that is, shot by a cell phone)
- I came to the conlusion that the photo in question is actually a Livadas selfie, So, there is no copyright infringment, although since it still appears as copyrighted at his blog it might be neeeded to be clearly stated in the file description that it's a self-portrait. ǁ ǁǁǁ Chalk19 (talk) 19:33, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per above. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:36, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Copyright status of the figurine? El Grafo (talk) 11:45, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:36, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
No COM:FOP in Iran. 4nn1l2 (talk) 12:10, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:35, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
No Commons:Freedom of panorama in Japan for sculptures. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:37, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
This is not the uploader's own work. It is a screenshot of possibly copyrighted material from CTA, a non-federal government agency. This CC license is invalid since the underlying material is copyrightable by CTA. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 16:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: This is probably ineligible for copyright as Template:PD-text, no? gobonobo + c 23:50, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- I think you are right. I have added that tag instead. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 05:46, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Despite the length, the message is basically utilitarian with little creativity involved. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:38, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
random sunset. No location given. Unused, uncategorized. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 20:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Keep Well, this image is not used but this is no generic reason for deletion. Even the lack of location data is not. From the technical point of view, this one's a good image that is of encyclopedic value and it is useable for educational purposes. As it should be kept. --Mosbatho (talk) 15:36, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:38, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by BevinKacon as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: CSD F10: unused, no global contributions
Does not qualify for CSD F10. Delete per COM:SCOPE (COM:NOTUSED, COM:EDUSE). Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr. 20:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:38, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Language code (мк) was in the wrong alphabet. Created the correct page with (mk), so this one needs deleting. B. Jankuloski (talk) 03:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 14:14, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Basically unused template from the early beginnings of Commons. I've removed the last two regular uses in the Category namespace (Diff1, Diff2), remaining uses are
- two very outdated pages in the Commons namespace, probably explaining the template's intended usage (Commons:图像, Commons:Bild),
- the sole content of the userpage of a non-user who's only contribution globally was putting that template there,
- part of the main content of the user page of User:Joterr, who hasn't been active since 2005.
I guess we don't really need this anymore, right? El Grafo (talk) 13:03, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 03:52, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Durgarao Vuddanti Durgarao Vuddanti (talk) 08:50, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Page already blanked. If you want it to be deleted, use {{SDG7}}. --Minoraxtalk 08:41, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
out of scope, personal photo Banfield - Amenazas aquí 13:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 08:44, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
certainly not own work (44 ko, .png, no metadata...) LeFnake (talk) 14:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- update : photo come from Poland Handball Federation and so is not own work.--LeFnake (talk) 11:55, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 08:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Photographer died in 1958 Achim (talk) 20:33, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- If the photographer died in 1958. Why should the photo be deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehrdad2021 (talk • contribs) 21:05, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- See top note on Category:Walter Stoneman. --Achim (talk) 21:09, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by Ellin Beltz. --Minoraxtalk 08:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 20:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 08:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
this is my photo i want to delete this now Myatthuu (talk) 22:12, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 08:46, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
No CC license found at https://elmunicipio.es/2016/11/memoria-falangista-falangistas-y-fidel-castro/ Banfield - Amenazas aquí 02:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:01, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Is this upload acceptable? E4024 (talk) 00:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Own work? Seems unlikely. Brianjd (talk) 13:35, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: dubious own-work claim. --ƏXPLICIT 10:48, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
not an own work Biplab Anand (Talk) 02:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Biplab Anand: Show the proof.--Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 10:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Junior Jumper: Actually, that’s your job. Brianjd (talk) 13:39, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Brianjd: I think the nominator should bear the responsibility of showing the proof. If he had nominated the file for deletion definitely he had some evidence.--Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 16:36, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment There are two distinct photos here. The original is this, uploaded by User:Manoj nav on January 9, 2010. Five years later, it was overwritten with the current image by User:Rohitdav97. The former looks like a legitimate self-made photo, while the latter is attributed to someone other than the uploader (also, see the upload logs for File:MUZAFFARPUR JUNCTION.jpg; this isn't the first time Rohitdav97 has done this). An admin at enwiki could check the page history at en:File:Muzzafarpur .jpg to confirm as well as restore the original file description. clpo13(talk) 16:18, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Manoj nav's revision, deleted Rohitdav97's revision. The latter overwrote the former's upload with an image watermarked by a photo agency without evidence of permission. --ƏXPLICIT 10:55, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
no proof that this is self work, with a reverse image i found the same image from multiple different sources before 2020:http://www.aum.edu/auburn-university-montgomery-2020-chancellor%E2%80%99s-business-breakfast-series-announces-first-speakers https://www.facebook.com/stevenformgm/ 47.223.78.205 03:20, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 10:46, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Copyvio: this appears to be a work of either the Louisiana state government or the Baton Rouge local government, neither of which release their works into the public domain. See http://copyright.lib.harvard.edu/states/louisiana/ Vahurzpu (talk) 04:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 10:45, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Delete redirect and salt filename with a "please use a more specific filename" warning. Ambiguous redirect. Johannes Block isn't the most obvious topic called "Block". The same filename was used in fair use images on zh.wp and yue.wp to discuss the Great Firewall of China's blocking of Wikipedia, so the ongoing existence of this redirect leads to confusion in discussion page archives. Deryck Chan (talk) 14:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- User:DragonflySixtyseven moved the portrait file to File:Johannes Block.jpg in 2016 with the edit summary "this is not Lawrence Block". In my opinion this strengthens the evidence that the redirect title is causing problems through its ambiguity. It's best to keep this redirect a broken link to avoid future misuse. Deryck Chan (talk) 14:54, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 11:01, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Delete per COM:EDUSE. I'm unsure of the usefulness of this image. Seems more like a meme. BriefEdits (talk) 21:05, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 10:57, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Arcticcitizen (talk · contribs)
[edit]Possible copyright violation. Person on photo died in 2000.
Maxinvestigator (talk) 07:56, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 13:35, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
FIle unused, its contents available in an .svg vector file much smaller in size. Jean-Mahmoud (talk) 00:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. Per nom: the file is not used (and barely usable since it is very low quality). Kathisma (talk) 20:08, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 05:48, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Please see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hilmi Öztürk, 1995.jpg. E4024 (talk) 00:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom.--Nanahuatl (talk) 21:58, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Fitindia deleted the file. --Podzemnik (talk) 05:48, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
bad quality .png file, while a higher quality .svg file is available for the exact same content Jean-Mahmoud (talk) 00:35, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- File in use. Please replace it on the other projects. Kathisma (talk) 20:06, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: File in use. --Podzemnik (talk) 05:49, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
The file is within project scope for upcoming post.
Deleted: Unused personal file. --Podzemnik (talk) 05:52, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
No evidence photograph is in public domain; rationale (which isn't valid anyway) only applies to the pattern on the flag. Vahurzpu (talk) 04:33, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 05:52, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
I guess he is a singer from Azerbaijan, therefore would be in scope although does not have an article (does he?) but I am not sure if this is an own picture as declared. E4024 (talk) 04:39, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Dubious own work. --Podzemnik (talk) 05:53, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Redir should be removed, a presumed picture of Wladislaus II Jagiello should not be displayed as Sigismundus II Augustus Michał Sobkowski (talk) 08:03, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 05:55, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
A version found here in 2014 https://www.cronacheletterarie.com/2014/12/18/breve-trattato-sulla-sottile-arte-del-go/. Dubious claim of own work as he died in 2016 Gbawden (talk) 08:16, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Published outside of Commons before, OTRS permission needed. --Podzemnik (talk) 05:56, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
This map is not own work. Real source, real author and evidence of free license are needed. Taivo (talk) 08:25, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 05:57, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Background music is copyrighted. If the video is reuploaded without music, there may be no copyright issue remaining. Fæ (talk) 09:21, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. User:Victureca2001 please use non-copyrighted music and reupload the file if needed. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:04, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Images from the University of Colorado are copyrighted A1Cafel (talk) 09:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:05, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
copyvio, artworks by artist who died in 2014, no fop
- File:Chorraum der St.-Marien-Kirche (Tripkau).jpg
- File:Fußboden der St.-Marien-Kirche (Tripkau).jpg
- File:Innenraum der St.-Marien-Kirche (Tripkau) 2.jpg
- File:Innenraum der St.-Marien-Kirche (Tripkau) 3.jpg
- File:Innenraum der St.-Marien-Kirche (Tripkau).jpg
- File:Kreuzformen der St.-Marien-Kirche (Tripkau).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_3.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Martin Sg. (talk) 09:31, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not an expert on copyright, but does the artist here really hold the copyright on the entire interior of the church? The interior itself was built as early as 1864 and the artist had the interior largely repainted in 1998. The interior of a church built in 1998 could be photographed for example, too. Why is it not allowed to photograph this interior? I can understand that File:Kreuzformen der St.-Marien-Kirche (Tripkau).jpg could violate the copyright, because only the design of the artist is shown. Nevertheless many thanks for the critical review! ––FriedrichFrisch (talk) 22:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Every single photo shows parts of the artwork by Ludwig Ehrler, which is protected by law, doesn’t matter that other elements shown there are older. --Martin Sg. (talk) 14:24, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- But then unfortunately it is also necessary to delete the file File:Orgel der St.-Marien-Kirche (Tripkau).jpg, isn't it? It also shows parts of the artwork. --FriedrichFrisch (talk) 21:06, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- Every single photo shows parts of the artwork by Ludwig Ehrler, which is protected by law, doesn’t matter that other elements shown there are older. --Martin Sg. (talk) 14:24, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not an expert on copyright, but does the artist here really hold the copyright on the entire interior of the church? The interior itself was built as early as 1864 and the artist had the interior largely repainted in 1998. The interior of a church built in 1998 could be photographed for example, too. Why is it not allowed to photograph this interior? I can understand that File:Kreuzformen der St.-Marien-Kirche (Tripkau).jpg could violate the copyright, because only the design of the artist is shown. Nevertheless many thanks for the critical review! ––FriedrichFrisch (talk) 22:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. File:Orgel der St.-Marien-Kirche (Tripkau).jpg could be considered de minis. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:07, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
It's a fake. Head of Russian Empress, the body from the First lady File:Lhayes.jpeg. Should be deleted for not spreading the fakes. Shakko (talk) 09:53, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:09, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Delete there is no Freedom of Panorama exception in France, so this modern 1970 building is copyright and require the permission of the architect for a derivative photo. Ww2censor (talk) 09:53, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ernaux Eric (talk) 10:35, 3 June 2020 (UTC) Je note votre remarque, pertinente. Cette photo a pour vocation d'informer, et n'a pas de caractère commercial, ce qui ne dispense pas de respecter les droits de l'architecte et du sculpteur. Je viens de demander à mes responsables si nous disposons de ces droits. J'observe toutefois que les ensembles architecturaux semblent ne pas nécessiter d'autorisation (cf. Louvre Museum Wikimedia Commons.jpg)... La précédente photo de la page du Musée de La Poste (L Adresse musée de la Poste, façade.jpg, aujourd'hui obsolète) montrait autant la rue Vaugirard que le bâtiment lui-même... Si une photo du Musée reprend le même cadrage, et au cas où nous n'aurions pas les droits de l'architecte et du sculpteur, vous l'accepteriez
- Ernaux Eric (talk) 17:11, 3 June 2020 (UTC) J'ai obtenu les réponses de la directrice de communication du Musée de La Poste (ma responsable) : concernant les droits architecturaux, André Chatelin est décédé sans ayant-droits et le Cabinet Jung Architectures (qui a modifié l'entrée du Musée lors de la rénovation 2014-2019) nous autorise la reproduction photographique de son ouvrage (intérieur/extérieur) ; concernant la sculpture, nous avons obtenu des ayant-droits de Robert Juvin l'autorisation de la photographier. Nous dire s'il faut vous transmettre les documents afférents.
- Ruthven: is an French/Italian/English speaking administrator who can explain the situation and determine if what you say allows us to keep this image - est un administrateur qui parle français/italien/anglais peut expliquer la situation et déterminer si ce que vous dites nous permet de conserver cette image. Merci Ww2censor (talk) 19:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:10, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
uploaded in error AndyPurves (talk) 12:57, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Speedy delete Uploader request on day of upload. Not in use. Brianjd (talk) 13:48, 3 June 2020 (UTC)- Note that the uploader also uploaded the file to w:File:The entrance of The Gordon Craig Theatre, Stevenage in 2014.jpg, where a different author is credited. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:23, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- The enwiki file description credits “Robert Mills Photography”, which is also in the metadata of the Commons version. The enwiki file description also says that OTRS is pending. The enwiki copy is in use, which I guess makes it in scope.
- @AndyPurves: Why did you upload the file both here and on enwiki? Brianjd (talk) 03:06, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- The file was also uploaded to w:File:The Gordon Craig Theatre, Stevenage, entrance viewed from town centre ramp.jpg, but speedily deleted as a duplicate. New users sometimes make the mistake of uploading multiple copies of files. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:37, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- Fair enough. The Commons upload was done from enwiki too. Brianjd (talk) 11:18, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- The file was also uploaded to w:File:The Gordon Craig Theatre, Stevenage, entrance viewed from town centre ramp.jpg, but speedily deleted as a duplicate. New users sometimes make the mistake of uploading multiple copies of files. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:37, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:12, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Low quality GIF image, high quality version available at File:Johan Ihre, 1707-1780, professor (Magnus Hallman) - Nationalmuseum - 15707.tif Thuresson (talk) 14:14, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:14, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
только для коммерческого использования Андрей Олешко (talk) 14:45, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Author's request shortly after upload. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:15, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
не хочу размещать Андрей Олешко (talk) 14:46, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Author's request shortly after upload. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:15, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
не хочу размещать работу Андрей Олешко (talk) 14:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Author's request shortly after upload. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:15, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
не хочу размещать работу Андрей Олешко (talk) 14:50, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Author's request shortly after upload. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:15, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Film poster, no evidence that uploader or Flickr account is copyright holder. Related nomination: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Low resolution A PrimeiraPedra.jpg Chenzw Talk 15:02, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Now there is CCBYSA notice on the website. I've tagged the file. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:19, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unlikely that this is the original work of a medical crowdsourced encyclopedia. More likely that it's from https://www.davismedical.com/Products/GE-MAC-5500-HD-EKG-Machine__GEN-EKG-2053900-013.aspx Ytoyoda (talk) 16:46, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unlikely that the logo of the university belongs to a crowdsourced encyclopedia Ytoyoda (talk) 16:47, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:22, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
copyvio, shows contemporary artwork and bookcovers, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 18:17, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- echt jetzt? Wenn irgendwie ein aktuelles Buch zu sehen ist, ist das ein Löschgrund? Oder ist das selbstgemalte Bild einer Bürgerin des Dorfes das Problem? Oder beides? --Zollernalb (talk) 19:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ich frage mich auch, welches Copyright (wessen und auf was) hier verletzt wird. Für das Bild an der Wand könnte man de minimis vertreten (könnte, ich bin mir nicht sicher, aber es ist jedenfalls nicht von vorneherein ausgeschlossen: Das Bild ist nicht der Hauptgegenstand dieser Aufnahme). Für die rechts recht klein zu erkennenden Bücher eine Copyright-Verletzung anzunehmen, kommt mir erst mal recht gewagt vor. Zumal die Verlage (als Rechteinhaber für die Buch-Cover) ganz sicher nichts gegen ein solches Foto haben ;–). Hm, da müssen Experten ran … Jedenfalls bitte nicht ohne eingehende Diskussion löschen. Vielen Dank! :–) --Aristeas (talk) 16:59, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment In my opinion, the painting on the wall is too prominent for COM:DM. It's right in the centre of the photograph, and it's large. The book covers I would see as less of a problem, as the intention of this photo is to show the public bookcase, the individual book covers are small and might be covered by de minimis. But well, the "self-painted painting of a citizen of the village" ("das selbstgemalte Bild einer Bürgerin des Dorfes") is automatically protected by copyright, as any painting whether the painter is famous or not, so this is a problem. We would need permission under a free license by the painter. Or maybe it could be blurred out... Gestumblindi (talk) 21:19, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
- Wenn das selbstgemalte Bild, auch wenn es hier nicht um dieses geht, ein Problem ist, dann könnte ich die Freigabe beantragen, wenn ich wüsste wer die Bürgerin ist. Weißt Du es Zollernalb ? Und können wir die Bücher dann vergessen, um die es ja hier auch nicht geht ?! Liebe Grüße --Olga Ernst (talk) 10:46, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
- ich kann fragen. Aber vielleicht ist es einfacher, ich hänge das Bild ab und mache ein neues Foto... --Zollernalb (talk) 09:41, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
- Wenn das selbstgemalte Bild, auch wenn es hier nicht um dieses geht, ein Problem ist, dann könnte ich die Freigabe beantragen, wenn ich wüsste wer die Bürgerin ist. Weißt Du es Zollernalb ? Und können wir die Bücher dann vergessen, um die es ja hier auch nicht geht ?! Liebe Grüße --Olga Ernst (talk) 10:46, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Klar, noch einfacher ;-) !! Liebe Grüße --Olga Ernst (talk) 11:27, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Hallo nochmal, habe hier ein Bild bearbeitet File:Öffentliches Bücherregal (bearb.), Boll (Hechingen).jpg Ob man es auch so nehmen könnte ? Die Wand einfarbig gehalten sah etwas fad aus !! Sonst muss doch ein Neues her. Liebe Grüße --Olga Ernst (talk) 17:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
,_Boll_(Hechingen).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: The books surely are de minis but the painting to me stand out too much to be considered de minis. It's a case that is on a border which can be seen from the fact that this request has been open for 4 months. If we're unsure, we should delete per COM:PCP. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:29, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
low res duplicate of File:Nordseite des Kunsttempels, Kunststaette Bossard.JPG Aeroid (talk) 18:18, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:29, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Better file of the same theme was uploaded. Dipascz (talk) 20:11, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Cropped version of File:Joe-barboza-web.jpg. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:31, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
small file, unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 20:38, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:31, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Unusually edited. not sure if it complies with COM:EDUSE BriefEdits (talk) 22:12, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:32, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
false "own work" declaration; accurate copy of [4] Bogomolov.PL (talk) 22:51, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:32, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
No FoP for sculptures in Argentina Banfield - Amenazas aquí 02:57, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 07:14, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 02:20, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:43, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by 46.61.152.186 as Speedy (speedy delete) and the most recent rationale was: self advertisement
Converted by me to regular DR, as image does not qualify for speedy deletion. However, it should be discussed whether it is in COM:SCOPE. -- Túrelio (talk) 12:42, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: seems out of scope. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:24, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Микола Василечко as no permission (No permission since).Previously uploaded by same contributor and deleted as missing permission. — Racconish 💬 14:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: unlikely to be own work, unclear copyright status. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:25, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
High quality .svg file of much smaller size available for the same content Jean-Mahmoud (talk) 00:32, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- on this day, the file is in use. Kathisma (talk) 20:05, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: in use. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Unused PNG file superseded by SVG file A1Cafel (talk) 02:08, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: already redirected. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:47, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 02:20, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep. The main focus is the tattoo shop not the artwork. Kingofthedead (talk) 05:50, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:48, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 02:20, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:48, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
2020 film screenshot Caulfield (talk) 10:21, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:50, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Redundant to File:Fairepart (cropped).jpg. Jonteemil (talk) 04:43, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
- Keep Revoked, files shouldn't be deleted if marked as source of another file.Jonteemil (talk) 05:26, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. ~riley (talk) 07:19, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted object A1Cafel (talk) 10:24, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:51, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative work of a copyrighted object A1Cafel (talk) 10:24, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:51, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
檔案有不足之處以及扁額反光。 姒姓賢寧 (talk) 17:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Jusjih, Minorax, Mys 721tx, and Shizhao: Can some of you have a look at this please? --Podzemnik (talk) 06:25, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Podzemnik: It's a self-request citing poor quality of the image. I do not have any objections. -Mys_721tx (talk) 18:15, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Google Translate: "The file has shortcomings and flat brow reflections." But on Aug. 6, user uploaded a new version. I can only assume that the deletion no longer applies. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:56, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
COM:TOYS. Yuraily Lic (talk) 12:46, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 12:16, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
COM:TOYS. Yuraily Lic (talk) 12:47, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 12:16, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files in Category:Wikimedia Cuteness Association
[edit]The photographs fail to meet the official guidelines of COM:TOYS, specifically:
- When uploading a picture of a toy, you must show that the toy is in the public domain in both the United States and in the source country of the toy. In the United States, copyright is granted for toys even if the toy is ineligible for copyright in the source country.
There has been no evidence presented that the toys at the focus of this photograph, and named in the category or title, are public domain. Photographs where there is a potential de minimis rationale, and other items or people may be the main focus, have not been selected in this request.
For an in-depth background and explanation of Commons copyright policies, refer to the Stuffed Animals essay and the precedent of prior closely related deletion requests: Petit tigre, Erminig, Wendy the Weasel & Percy Plush, Wikimania 2014 Day 1, Jimmy Wales meeting Mr Penguin.
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
--Fæ (talk) 17:54, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
- Addendum The list of other examples used in the nomination has been reformatted in this change for better clarity, but there has been no material change to content. --Fæ (talk) 09:15, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- Keep the following at least as they do not bear any resemblance to the nomination statement:
- File:QueryBoo.svg - not a photograph
- File:Wikimedia Cuteness Association-Logo v1.svg - not a photograph
- File:Structured Data Bee - crochet_pattern.pdf - not a photograph but a cc0 licensed design for crocheted toys
- File:Structured Data Bee 01 (cropped).jpg - the design is CC0 licensed
- File:Structured Data Bee 01.jpg - the design is CC0 licensed. Thryduulf (talk) 11:46, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep all in subdirectories as none of these have not been tagged for deletion and uploaders (and other interested parties) have not been notified and it is unclear whether the nominator actually wants to delete them or not (many are trivially obviously de minimus or otherwise not problematic so the do need to be individually nominated). Thryduulf (talk) 11:46, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Info Two files are listed in the nomination, no others. --Fæ (talk) 07:54, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: Please see User:Elcobbola/Stuffed Animals & COM:TOYS. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:48, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:Wikimedia Cuteness Association
[edit]- File:Alxces and Shaxal in wikidata workshop.jpg
- File:Alxces and Shaxal.1.jpg
- File:Alxces and Shaxal.2.jpg
- File:Alxces and Shaxal.3.jpg
- File:Alxces and Shaxal.4.jpg
- File:IAlxces and Shaxal.jpg
Yuraily Lic (talk) 22:10, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 11:59, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Wikimedia Cuteness Association
[edit]- File:Frog at Wikimania 2018.jpg
- File:Mascottes à la wikiconvention francophone 2019.jpg
- File:Opening Session GLAM WIKI Tel Aviv Conference 2018 SIV 1655.JPG
- File:Wikimedia CEE Meeting 2018 Second Day 27 (cropped).jpg
- File:Wikimedia CEE Meeting 2018 Second Day 27.jpg
- File:Wikimedia Cuteness Association at Wiki Techstorm 2018.jpg
- File:Wikizade Bambi Cuteness.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Yuraily Lic (talk) 12:52, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- It should be safe to merge these two open DRs. Where mascots have been handmade by the uploader (or friends), this needs to be explained clearly with the copyright release, confirming they are original toys, for example the crocheted bees for wikidata and not based on a commercial pattern. --Fæ (talk) 13:16, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep File:Wikizade Bambi Cuteness.jpg is hand mande by a friend. Hard to understand any meaning for deletion. --Nevit Dilmen (talk) 17:33, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Nevit: Is your friend a Wikimedian? If so, they should simply make a statement here agreeing to the CC-BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL 1.2+ licenses you have chosen. (Your act of uploading the photo only releases your portion of the copyright.) If not, then they need to send a copyright release to COM:OTRS. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:51, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 12:19, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
This image is from a Swaminarayan Aksharpith published book, it is not original work as the user has noted. -Apollo1203 (talk) 01:13, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, there are previous publications on TinEye as well. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:21, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ibadibam as no permission (No permission since)
Below COM:TOO US? Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr. 01:20, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- My best guess, based on the image and the name of the uploader, is that the uploader is affiliated with the copyright owner, and may be able to provide proof of ownership or permission. Ibadibam (talk) 20:13, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:24, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ibadibam as no permission (No permission since)
COM:TOO US? Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr. 01:33, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- My best guess, based on the image and the name of the uploader, is that the uploader is affiliated with the copyright owner, and may be able to provide proof of ownership or permission. Ibadibam (talk) 20:14, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete My 2 cents , possible copyvio under COM:Packaging Encik Tekateki (talk) 10:29, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:24, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Derivative work of non-free content (F3) Batholith (talk) 10:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Matlin (talk) 12:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:28, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Derivative work of non-free content (F3) Batholith (talk) 10:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Matlin (talk) 12:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination -- no FOP in Japan for non-buildings. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:29, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Delete Probable copyright infringment. First of all the low quality of the image indicates it is highly unlikely to be "own work". Furthermore, the photo can be found on internet prior to its upload at Commons, cf. this. ǁ ǁǁǁ Chalk19 (talk) 22:59, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Not used, delete in peace. --E4024 (talk) 02:10, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 05:46, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Sing akon Wiki Jelajah mboh ngopo... Fandy Aprianto Rohman (talk) 11:11, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Ruthven (msg) 12:12, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
The source of this file is from kompasiana.com (blog). Might be non-free/copyrighted image. Diki Ananta (talk) 05:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete This and other files are sourced to https://www.kompasiana.com/ and I also do not see a license anywhere confirming that the file is licensed under a free license.
- Unless someone find a free license somewhere on the website it might be a good idea to check the other files on https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?target=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.kompasiana.com%2F&title=Special%3ALinkSearch too. --MGA73 (talk) 14:42, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination--no evidence of a free license now or in https://web.archive.org/web/20190331093556/https://www.kompasiana.com/bamset2014/56addfaaf47a615f07cee86a/drumblek-marching-band-tradisional-salatiga-yang-terus-berkembang. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 18:56, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Sing akon Wiki Jelajah mboh ngopo... Fandy Aprianto Rohman (talk) 11:12, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Ruthven (msg) 12:12, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
The source of this file is from drumblek-salatiga.blogspot.com (blog). Might be non-free/copyrighted image. Labdajiwa (talk) 05:35, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment The file is also located on https://budaya-indonesia.org/Drumblek-Drumband-Kreatif and other files from this website is licensed as {{PD-IDGov}}. I can't verify that the website is a government website so I sent them an e-mail asking them. --MGA73 (talk) 14:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- @MGA73: It's almost been a week. Did they reply to your email? The website is lack of license information. The previous deletion request is in Javanese language, meaning "The order (to delete this file) is from Wiki Jelajah (organizer) I don't know why (may be license issue)". Regards. Labdajiwa (talk) 23:36, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Labdajiwa: Sorry! The mail was rejected from their server and also when I tried again. So I can't get a response from them. Sadly. --MGA73 (talk) 05:39, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
- @MGA73: It's almost been a week. Did they reply to your email? The website is lack of license information. The previous deletion request is in Javanese language, meaning "The order (to delete this file) is from Wiki Jelajah (organizer) I don't know why (may be license issue)". Regards. Labdajiwa (talk) 23:36, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 19:12, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
No permission from either the artist or the photographer. Lukács died in 2016, so there's apparently no possibility that this is out of copyright. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:19, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- The same considerations seem to apply to:
- Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:21, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
@Justlettersandnumbers:
User: Berndsch72
I created the Wikipedia entry about Agnes Lukacs myself. In 1946 the Socialist Zionist Party ICHUD published the album "Auschwitz Nöi Tábor". I have owned a copy of this album for some time now and have created the two photos 'Auschwitz Noi Tabor' and 'Összebújva' from it. There is no way to get permission from the original Copryright owner, because Ichud (Ihud) was dissolved in 1948 (see proof). I also own more of their work including the original drawing 'Rémület (Fright)', of which I have taken a photograph myself. Agnes Lukacs was single and had no siblings. Her parents are of course deceased. There is nobody who owns the rights to her works. Therefore I assume that I am allowed to make reproductions of her works which are in my possession.
Quote: …..a letter sent by Béla Dénes, leader of the Social Democrat Zionist Ihud - Mapai party, in April 1945…..In 1948 , the Social Democrats were forced to merge with the Communists to form the Hungarian Workers ' Party….. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berndsch72 (talk • contribs) 15:42, 23 June 2020 (UTC) ～～～～ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berndsch72 (talk • contribs) 16:02, 23 June 2020 (UTC)
- Berndsch72, I believe that your assumption is incorrect – you're not allowed to make copies of works in your possession unless you also own the copyright in them, or have the permission of the copyright holder. In the same way, we can't host copies works that are protected by copyright without the permission of the copyright holder. Since you don't know who that is now that Lukacs is dead, there seems to be little likelihood that we will receive that permission. I think we can be confident that rights in her work are not held by "nobody". Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:19, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
@Justlettersandnumbers: User: Berndsch72
I have tried to get in contact to the person who runs Lukacs' archive. Since Lukacs was suffering from dementia in her last days, it is kind of unlikely that he does have the missing permission. He has not answered yet but I will inform you asap. ～～～～
Deleted: per nomination. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 19:15, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Sophisticated logo. The UN logo is itself protected: https://shop.un.org/rights-permissions. WHO website is copyrighted too. Anyway exact duplicate of File:World Health Organization Logo.svg Patrick Rogel (talk) 14:08, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Same as the English language logo (File:World Health Organization Logo.svg), although that never copyrighted. But also, I recently emailed to the UN rights permission of this logo. --ZmeytheDragon16 14:21, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Not an exact duplicate of File:World Health Organization Logo.svg, as the language is different. I also don't see why {{PD-UN-no notice}} wouldn't apply to the logo in this case but it applies to other uses. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 19:26, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Source Own work - false information or flag is not official O revolucionário aliado (talk) 23:49, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Not own work, above the TOO. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 19:52, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by DragonflySixtyseven as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: blatantly not uploader's own work
Clearly historical photo. But source and author needed. Might be {{PD-Czechoslovakia-old}} or {{PD-Czechoslovakia-anon}} but without confirmation of such, Delete per COM:PCP Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr. 00:03, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Hello, I am the one who published this picture of Franz Irblich. I received it from his son, Helmut Irblich, who is the owner of this privat picture of his father. I can assert that Helmut Irblich is willing to give this picture into public domain and if someone tells me how I can give prove of this in a way accepted by Wikipedia I will do so promptly.--DownUnder36 (talk) 08:59, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Ownership of the physical image does not automatically mean that you own the copyright. Please have the copyright holder contact COM:OTRS. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 20:00, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Above the threshold of originality. GreenComputer (talk) 12:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: This might be below the TOO for the United States per COM:TOO United States since most of the elements are pretty basic shapes with perhaps only the 3D-effect/shading on the flag pole being a bit of concern (but that seems to be just OK). Commons files uploaded as {{PD-textlogo}} or {{PD-shape}}, however, need to be PD both in the United States and in their country of origin. Since the club en:PSV Eindhoven is based out of the en:Netherlands, COM:TOO Netherlands also comes into play.What's written about the Netherland's TOO on Commons is a bit vague, but seems to say that the work must have it's "own original character", etc. and that shapes which are "so trivial or banal" are excluded from this. So, while most of the individual elements of this logo might be considered trivial and banal on their own, the combination of them together plus the flag pole might be creative enough to push it over the TOO for the Netherlands and thus not able to be kept on Commons. For English Wikipedia purposes, there exist the non-free file en:File:PSV Eindhoven.svg which will continue to be used if this file is deleted. (It might even be possible to change the licensing of that file to en:Template:PD-ineligible-USonly for local use on English Wikipedia). There are, however, other uses of this file on other language Wikipedia's where non-free content may not be allowed and these uses will be more directly impacted by this file's deletion. So, unless this file is clearly too old to still be considered eligible for copyright protection, whether it can be kept is going to depend upon the Netherland's TOO and how it's interpreted. Perhaps there've been some DR's involving the Netherland's TOO with respect to similar logos which might provide a bit of insight? -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:03, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 09:58, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Per the note at Category:Heinrich Hoffmann, still copyrighted in Germany. If deleted, should be moved to enwiki, as they are PD in the US. Vahurzpu (talk) 03:20, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Can be restored in 2028. --Rosenzweig τ 20:12, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Der Fotograf Wilhelm Arthur Vogel aus Schwarzenberg i. Sa. starb - wie im WP-Artikel nachzulesen ist - erst 1962, so dass das Urheberrecht noch nicht erloschen ist. Hejkal (talk) 21:39, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep Seems to confuse the company with the son of the founder. Refer to the deletion request for File:Chemnitz, Sachsen - Nitschhammer, Kasino (back) (Zeno Ansichtskarten).jpg. --Fæ (talk) 15:35, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
_(Zeno_Ansichtskarten).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
- Hier wird durch mich nichts verwechselt, da ich diesen Verlag seit vielen Jahrzehnten kenne. Der Kunstverlag Wilhelm Vogel, Schwarzenberg i. Sa. befand sich von 1899 bis 1962 im Besitz von Wilhelm Arthur Vogel, dem Sohn des 1899 verstorbenen Verlagsgründers Wilhelm Vogel. Die hier gezeigte Aufnahme von Nitschhamer wurde vom Firmenbesitzer Wilhelm Arthur Vogel gefertigt, dieser starb im Jahre 1962, so dass dass Urheberrecht in Deutschland an dieser Ansichtskarte erst Ende 2032 erlischt. Hier liegt eindeutig und zweifelsfrei eine Verletzung des Urheberrechts vor. Hejkal (talk) 20:25, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
- We seem to be talking at cross purposes. The only credit on the postcard is to the publisher, "Wilhelm Vogel", the company that Wilhelm Arthur Vogel inherited. There is no statement on the postcard as to a named photographer. Where a company or publisher is stated and nothing else, then copyright is normally considered expired a maximum of 70 years after publication. --Fæ (talk) 16:04, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
- Wilhelm Arthur Vogel ist von 1899 bis zu seinem Tod 1862 alleiniger Besitzer des Verlages Wilhelm Vogel in Schwarzenberg i. Sa. gewesen und alleiniger Fotograf, Urheber und Rechteinhalber aller in dieser Zeit veröffentlichten Ansichtskarten dieses Verlages. Die betreffende Aufnahme wurde von Wilhelm Arthur Vogel um 1910 angefertigt. Er als Urheber und Rechteinhaber starb 1962. Damit erlischt das Urheberrecht an dieser Ansichtskarte zweifelsfrei erst Ende 2032. Hier liegt ein Verstoß gegen das Urhebrrecht von Wilhelm Arthur Vogel vor.--Hejkal (talk) 19:48, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- We seem to be talking at cross purposes. The only credit on the postcard is to the publisher, "Wilhelm Vogel", the company that Wilhelm Arthur Vogel inherited. There is no statement on the postcard as to a named photographer. Where a company or publisher is stated and nothing else, then copyright is normally considered expired a maximum of 70 years after publication. --Fæ (talk) 16:04, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
- Hier wird durch mich nichts verwechselt, da ich diesen Verlag seit vielen Jahrzehnten kenne. Der Kunstverlag Wilhelm Vogel, Schwarzenberg i. Sa. befand sich von 1899 bis 1962 im Besitz von Wilhelm Arthur Vogel, dem Sohn des 1899 verstorbenen Verlagsgründers Wilhelm Vogel. Die hier gezeigte Aufnahme von Nitschhamer wurde vom Firmenbesitzer Wilhelm Arthur Vogel gefertigt, dieser starb im Jahre 1962, so dass dass Urheberrecht in Deutschland an dieser Ansichtskarte erst Ende 2032 erlischt. Hier liegt eindeutig und zweifelsfrei eine Verletzung des Urheberrechts vor. Hejkal (talk) 20:25, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Accd. to de.wp Wilhelm Arthur Vogel took over his father's company in 1899 and was its sole photographer, so presumably he was the photographer of a 1917 postcard. Also AFAIK Hejkal is an archivist from that area (or close enough) so presumably he knows what he's talking about. That no photographer is explicitly named on the card does not matter in German copyright, the assumption that "then copyright is normally considered expired a maximum of 70 years after publication" is plain wrong. The file can be restored in 2033. --Rosenzweig τ 20:04, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
_(Zeno_Ansichtskarten).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Der Autor dieser Karte Wilhelm Arthur Vogel in Schwarzenberg starb 1962. Das Urheberrecht ist noch nicht erloschen und eine Löschung daher geboten. Hejkal (talk) 21:40, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
_(Zeno_Ansichtskarten).jpg){kind=link}
- Keep The publisher is Wilhelm Vogel but this is the name of the publishing company set up by Fürchtegott Wilhelm Vogel, later inherited by Arthur Vogel. To claim there is a copyright issue here, there would need better evidence that Arthur is the photographer. Refer to Arthur Vogel (photographer). --Fæ (talk) 15:33, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Keeping the back of that postcard does not make much sense when the front was deleted. To be restored in 2033 as well. --Rosenzweig τ 20:05, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
_(Zeno_Ansichtskarten).jpg){kind=link}
Useless file, unified in .svg format with much higher quality for a much smaller size Jean-Mahmoud (talk) 00:30, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep In use, has substantial differences from the SVG. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:06, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I think we could keep it per AntiCompositeNumber. It is substantially different from the SVG file, as it features a mural crown. But per description, it is a Picture of the book "Saint-Louis Porte de France", is it really free? It's certainly not "own work". Gestumblindi (talk) 21:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: I agree that it is different from SVG but doesn't seem to be an own work, likely to be taken from some book. I have performed some research but couldn't find the original source. --rubin16 (talk) 08:42, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Likely copyvio. While this is included in the public-domain Jargon File, it isn't authored by ESR like the rest of it, and is therefore probably copyrighted. https://web.archive.org/web/20110815091754/http://e-pix.com/CPUWARS/index.html supports that. Vahurzpu (talk) 05:29, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --rubin16 (talk) 08:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
~0:18-0:23 likely to be unfree (Copyrighted satellite image, VOA is not the copyright holder) 58.152.205.199 09:08, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --rubin16 (talk) 08:59, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
No indication from the source that the file is available under a free licence. In addition, the source indicated is the source for the data, not the actual chart. The chart almost certainly comes from an uncredited Swiss newspaper (Tribune de Genève or 24 Heures), as "I. Caudullo" is a graphist working there and the design of the graph is similar to graphs published in these medias (see eg [5]). The user was asked about it (and another 2 similar images) on his talk page in early April, without any answer. Schutz (talk) 13:14, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment One could possibly argue that this graph, which has no remarkable design elements and is a pretty standard way of visualisation, is below the threshold of originality, but I'm not sure... also, the data as such may be protected by database protection. Gestumblindi (talk) 21:09, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ineed, it is always complicated to make an assessment based on the threshold of originality, with the subjectivity it involves. When nominating the image, I immediately recognized the design used by the newspapers mentioned above -- layout, fonts, they all looked familiar (I had not heard the name of the designer, and only looked it up afterwards). To me it is an indication that there is uniqueness and originality in the chart. But on the other hand, I completely agree that the choice of the plot and the way the data is visualized is standard; the design elements are really minor in comparison. If the graph is important, I'd rather have someone replot it in the same way under a free licence than reuse this one which is (at best) in an unclear situation. With regards to the data, it would likely not be protected in Switzerland (no database protection). Schutz (talk) 20:41, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: I tend to delete the image: I agree that the visualisation is pretty standard but it would be safer just to replot it and publish under a free license. Let's stay on the safe side if we aren't sure that the chart is trivial enough. --rubin16 (talk) 09:03, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
If I am not wrong, this could be about the launching of a new clothing brand "marca yomango" somewhere. Is this brand notable enough to be within our scope? And the image itself: What is the message? If a man wears "marca yomango" shirts, women will tear apart the shirt? I am not expecting answers. Proposing to delete per COM:Scope (i.e. OoS) E4024 (talk) 17:09, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep I think it is related to en:Yomango and I think this photo and others are related to that "event" mentioned in the article. The files are currently not in use, but I think they were at that time since license reviewers spend time looking for the original source of the files. The files should of course be categorized in Category:Yomango or something like that so that the Wikipedias have better access to the files. Provided of course that the files are related to that use of the word. The articles currently have no photos. The topic is related to shoplifting so I do not think it will be easy to find actual persons who are willing to be photographed in the act. So I suggest we keep all the photos for now as they are the best we have. --MGA73 (talk) 06:49, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
- Per https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2002/12/49394.html it seems that "Yomango a creative action group from Barcelona that promotes day-to-day civil disobedience". --MGA73 (talk) 06:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: I would keep it. I have added Commons category to Wikidata item, the articles exist and it is possible that some of the photos could be used. --rubin16 (talk) 09:13, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
And also:
This file was initially tagged by Larryasou as no permission (No permission since). Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr. 20:55, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- The emblem used in the flag appears to be copyrighted by the People`s Government of Guangzhou Municipality (http://www.gz.gov.cn/), whose website contains the notice "广州市人民政府 版权所有" (The People`s Government of Guangzhou Municipality All Rights Reserved) and their English language website has the notice "Copyright © 2010 The People`s Government of GuangzhouMunicipality. All Rights Reserved". Would this image be subject to {{PD-PRC-exempt}}? --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr. 20:57, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Does File:Flag of the City of Guangzhou.png have the same problem? If not, why this file does? Moreover, the present state of file is a work of User:Bdgzczy, you should contact him. Hosmich (talk) 21:28, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Hosmich: Bdgzczy and others were notified. To answer your question, yes, the .png file does have the same issues. I will be adding it to this DR discussion. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr. 21:36, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- I have doublechecked the Government's website and noticed that there's no further copyright declaraction apart from the phrase mentioned above. However, this emblem is used widely on the government publicity materials. I would tend to admit it should fall within {{PD-PRC-exempt}}--Bdgzczy (talk) 23:45, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
- For which point in PD-PRC-exempt?--Larryasou (talk) 12:54, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
- Definitely original research, Guangzhou never has a city flag. Guangzhou has its own city seal between 1989 and 1998, but in 1998, China central government published a file that prohibits local government use their own seal or flag.--瑞丽江的河水 (talk) 02:31, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: doesn't seem to be covered by PD-PRC-exempt. --rubin16 (talk) 09:19, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
copyright violation (Toraya official site (Japanese) and Toraya official site (English)）--GOLFLF (talk) 03:12, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
- Even if the logo authorizes the publication of the logo, there is no use if it is submitted to the deletion request. If the logo was created before 1945 and is in the public domain in Japan (created and photographed before 1968), it is possible to post it, but you can delete it if it is still valid.--今紫 (talk) 10:41, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --rubin16 (talk) 09:21, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by A1Cafel as Copyvio. Nothing is copyrightable I'd say. Jonteemil (talk) 12:11, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Refer to COM:TOO Sweden: "A simple general rule is that if it is unlikely that two persons would create, for example, a text identically or similarly, the text is probably sufficiently original to qualify as a protected work." --A1Cafel (talk) 13:50, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- This derivative of the w:Three Crowns seems to not be original enough to be copyrightable.Jonteemil (talk) 21:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
- Well, the w:Three Crowns symbol seems to be free, but its particular rendering may be copyrighted. Can you provide an evidence that this particular rendering is considered PD? I looked for an example, but found that a very similar rendering is considered copyrighted by the uploader. Can you comment on this? Ankry (talk) 09:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- This derivative of the w:Three Crowns seems to not be original enough to be copyrightable.Jonteemil (talk) 21:06, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: No evidence that this particular rendering is below the Swedish threshold of originality. --De728631 (talk) 16:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
DSS is copyright, see https://skyview.gsfc.nasa.gov/current/cgi/survey.pl Lithopsian (talk) 19:38, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Made update utilizing public domain WISE space telescope data instead of DSS.--Trurle (talk) 22:08, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: First revision deleted, but the current upload is based on PD data. --De728631 (talk) 16:30, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
