Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2020/06/28
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
This is soft porn! The S is sukking and fukking itself! 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:09, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Are you stupid? This is supposed to be an indicator and has nothing to do with porn. User:The SVG Effect 20:18, 27 June 2020
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:24, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
This must be Fake News. A BLACK American general? I thought they hated African Americans? 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Good riddance. Delete this. 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:17, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Delete File MD shows not an own work. --E4024 (talk) 00:27, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. @E4024: Why do you say that md shows this image as not being own work? O only see gibberish (because i do not have the necessary fonts installed?) Tm (talk) 01:35, 28 June 2020 (UTC)- Keep Deletion request was opened by a vandal who has now been blocked. This image is "own work" and is being used in an article. Normal Op (talk) 01:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Procedural keep, no valid reason given for the nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:45, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Cropped? From what? 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:21, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
I emailed the woman this page is about for a photo, this is the direct file she gave me with an unedited file name. I did not crop it myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mochamedusae (talk • contribs) 00:28, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:47, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The file was previously nominated and kept per Commons:Deletion requests/File:2016 Billie Swalla cropped.png. The image is from the University of Washington and used on the subject's bio. The image is marked as own work but the deletion discussion makes it clear that this is not the uploader's own work and was received via email from the subject who is also very unlikely to the copyright holder. COM:OTRS confirmation of license from the copyright holder would be needed, Whpq (talk) 23:06, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
I did not realize it was on that website. I will try uploading the image with the proper citations and removing this file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mochamedusae (talk • contribs) 03 May 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mochamedusae (talk • contribs) 13:41, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Mochamedusae: It isn't an issue of "proper citations", but rather of copyright and licensing. The information on the file as you uploaded it made the claim that you are the copyright holder and that you released it under a free license. That is not true. What needs to happen is the thge copyright holder needs to provide the permission. Note that the copyright holder is very unlikely to be the subject of the photo. Whpq (talk) 13:48, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:43, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Soft porn! Three Mojitos get this old tramps erection going? 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:22, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Playing cards have NOTHING to do with porn. User:The SVG Effect 20:45, 27 June 2020
Yes they do. Look at this page on eBay. What is that, if not porn? 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 01:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC) Plus, the title has the word "tit" which means breast. 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 01:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
I see no porn in this file.
User:The SVG Effect 21:17, 27 June 2020
Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
This is unlikely to be the work of the uploader. See this Twitter post from 2014 for example. FredWalsh (talk) 05:25, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Looking at the other uploads by the same party I join Fred that there is something dubious at the "own work" claim. E4024 (talk) 17:04, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 01:45, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Taxi for Fry1989 or Fry1990 or some shit like that! 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:23, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Cos that doggy looks like it’s on heat! 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:25, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:49, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Cos it shows a gathering of pedophiles. There is probably raping going on behind those doors, 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:26, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:31, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:49, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Cos this ain’t a social media outlet. 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:29, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:32, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:52, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Cos the reflection off his bald head is hurting my eyes! 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
You just insulted Bruno Traversa. HOW RUDE!!!!!!!!!! User:The SVG Effect 20:37, 27 June 2020
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:32, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:52, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
What is so fucking difficult that people don’t understand what the words "author" and "source" mean? 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:31, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Mind your own freakin' business! User:The SVG Effect 20:34, 27 June 2020
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:24, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Why do we need an OVAL photo? What’s wrong with the original? 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:34, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:23, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Cos it shows actual sex taking place! 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:33, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Fake map! The Portuguese never got this far inland. Plus this isn’t Southeast Asia. 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:42, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:35, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:54, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Cos this ain’t Facebook. Stop posting your personal photos here! 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:54, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
What exactly is educational about this photo? I wish uploaders had to explain the education use for each one rather than just uploading hundreds of soft porn pics. This is not AshFriday by the way. 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. And trying to make a false flag against AshFriday is pretty low. Tm (talk) 01:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:54, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
What exactly is educational about this photo? I wish uploaders had to explain the education use for each one rather than just uploading hundreds of soft porn pics. 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:55, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
What exactly is educational about this photo? I wish uploaders had to explain the education use for each one rather than just uploading hundreds of soft porn pics. 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:49, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:55, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
What exactly is educational about this photo? I wish uploaders had to explain the education use for each one rather than just uploading hundreds of soft porn pics. 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:49, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:55, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Cos I demand a gallon of TITTY MILK every day! Hey (Redacted) 2A04:4A43:4C7F:AE6D:EDD8:D4D6:5865:6F80 18:24, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Vandalism by a kid or a retarded from the UK. --Achim (talk) 18:51, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Not educationally useful Fixpol (talk) 13:40, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
- Keep immediately. Fixpol seems unaware that Commons is not censored and can also illustrate adult topics such as sexuality or eroticism. So the deletion requests s/he launched are probably all invalid and abusive. See Commons:Project scope (and particularly COM:CENSORSHIP) and Commons:Sexual content. Also note that s/he should have launch a mass DR instead of a separate DR for each file. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 14:02, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Kept: Per TwoWings. Green Giant (talk) 15:31, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
What exactly is educational about this photo? I wish uploaders had to explain the education use for each one rather than just uploading hundreds of soft porn pics. 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:50, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:55, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Pornographic. There can't be an educational use for this The Cleaner (talk) 18:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
- Keep, not really pornographic (it's just nudity), but I don't see why it can't be both (pornographic and educational). –Tryphon☂ 18:27, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Invalid reason as Commons is not censored. Tabercil (talk) 03:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
- Keep As Tryphon and Tabercil. Jacopo Werther (talk) 08:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Not pornographic (using european standards), image of a porn actress who, by definition of her job, tends to be a lot naked (so it has intrinsic educational value), and most importantly image was provided with OTRS clearance, so there is not a personality rights (as far i see). Tm (talk) 03:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Not pornographic (using european standards). That's "only Pinup-level". In Germany, Pinup-Callendars with such images can be bought on market squares. Antonsusi (talk) 22:50, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Kept. –Tryphon☂ 22:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Not used pornograhpic image of not notable porno star. Instead last del req reasons, my main reason is out of scope. Herr Kriss (talk) 03:32, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Out of scope. Ryan Vesey Review me! 04:05, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - we don't require that every single person we have a photo of be notable: this is Commons, not en.wp. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:47, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Not being in use doesnt make an image out of scope (why is it that this argument is almost brought it this kind of deletion requests and not in trains or cats deletion requests?). Per last deletion requests this is not pornographic (using european standards), image of a porn actress who, by definition of her job, tends to be a lot naked (so it has intrinsic educational value), and most importantly image was provided with OTRS clearance, so there is not a personality rights question. Also, even more the fact that being or not notable (per wikipedia standards, irrelevant to commons) does not make this actresses a complete stranger in this sector of entertainment, so this isnt a random image of a random person, is a good quality photo of a actress in a niche (?) market. tThis image is clearly in scope in the depiction of pornographic actresses and the performance of some part their jobs, it is of good quality and has OTRS in it, it is also in scope as it depicts "Nude people in swimming pools", "Nude porn actresses", "Nude standing women", "Nude women with blond hair", "Women touching their breasts". Also this isnt a pornographic image and even if it was it would be in scope (or because of its pornographic content it woukd be more in scope in what is related to pornography). Could also the two users that think that this image is out of scope, expain better why is out of scope instead of just saying "out of scope". Tm (talk) 10:59, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep What Tm said... <G> Tabercil (talk) 12:42, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep per above. Reasonably well photographed; categories show usefulness. Infrogmation (talk) 04:28, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept Yann (talk) 08:35, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
What exactly is educational about this photo? I wish uploaders had to explain the education use for each one rather than just uploading hundreds of soft porn pics. 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:50, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Cos I demand a gallon of TITTY MILK every day! Hey (Redacted) 2A04:4A43:4C7F:AE6D:EDD8:D4D6:5865:6F80 18:23, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Vandalism by a kid or a retarded from the UK. --Achim (talk) 18:43, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Parco Natura Viva
[edit]No FOP in Italy.
- File:Rinoceronte bianco sentieri d'Africa.jpg
- File:Statua di Giraffa.jpg
- File:Statua di rinoceronte bianco.jpg
Yuraily Lic (talk) 07:31, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
- Delete No FOP in Italy. AshFriday (talk) 00:04, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Parco Natura Viva
[edit]No FOP in Italy.
- File:Anzu Parco natura Viva.jpg
- File:Elefante nano siciliano Parco Natura Viva.jpg
- File:Orso delle caverne Parco natura viva.jpg
Yuraily Lic (talk) 04:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Copyright violation 67.188.1.213 05:34, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
This image is owned by Getty Images. See https://www.insider.com/who-is-paris-jackson-2017-9 for example. 67.188.1.213 05:35, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: speedied delete as copyvio of Getty photo. JGHowes talk 08:13, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Parce qu’elle est Non-sens Moroseau (talk) 09:45, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense request by an Android app user. --Achim (talk) 11:50, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Parce qu’elle est Un selfie Moroseau (talk) 10:25, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense request by an Android app user. --Achim (talk) 11:54, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
copyright AnshumaanVishnu (talk) 12:07, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim (talk) 12:21, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Om persoonlijke redenen. Hij is naaste familie en geen publiek bezit! Abigaïl47 (talk) 18:28, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep: No valid reason, in use. --Achim (talk) 19:16, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep: No valid reason. Foto van ± 1875 Lidewij (talk) 06:40, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
- Luitenant-ter-zee 2e klasse Michiel Smits (1852-1882) (Ridder Militaire Willems-Orde 1875) verdronk bij de scheepsramp met de Zr.Ms. Adder. De 29 jarige Smits was bij zijn overlijden ongehuwd. Akte BS . Dit portret is opgenomen in het boek van P.H.K. van Schendel, De Nederlandsche Ridderorden. P. H. K. van Schendel. De Militaire Willemsorde (Verzameling portretten van ridders). Edam 1891. Door de leeftijd van foto zit deze binnen het publieke domein.
- Abigaïl47, u noemt de ongehuwd overleden Michiel Smits naaste familie. Verre familie is hier een betere term. Mvg, Lidewij (talk) 06:40, 6 June 2020 (UTC)
Lidewij ook mensen zonder kinderen hebben naaste familie! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abigaïl47 (talk • contribs) 19:43, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ja zeker, en dat was in dit geval meer dan een eeuw geleden. Met vriendelijke groet, Lidewij (talk) 20:16, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
- Dat een foto public domain is, moet je niet opvatten als "de afgebeelde persoon was publiek bezit". Het betekent enkel dat er op de afbeelding geen rechten meer zitten. Dat is-en-blijft zo, en de afbeelding hoeft daarom ook niet verwijderd te worden. Edoderoo (talk) 18:16, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Michiel Smits is de broer van mijn overgrootvader. Wij hebben een kleine familie. Voor de foto in het boek over de MWO is toestemming gevraagd, die hebben ze gegeven, maar dat ging niet van harte. Mijn betovergrootouders dachten dat het boek op een dag verouderd zou zijn en in de vergetelheid zou raken, dus dat het van tijdelijke aard zou zijn en slechts voor de liefhebber. Ook koste het boek geld. Hij zou dan tussen andere staan die ook een MWO hebben. Niemand wist toen dat er ooit een internet zou komen. Als hij gewoon oud was geworden met een gezin dan was het misschien geen probleem geweest. Maar omdat hij bij een ramp is omgekomen ligt dit allemaal veel gevoeliger. Denk je eens in dat er een galerij met foto `s van de overledenen van de MH17 ramp zou zijn. Iedereen begrijpt dat dat niet kan voor de nabestaanden ook niet over 100 jaar. Dat is bij de ramp met de Adder niet anders. Hierbij vraag ik om mijn gevoelens en die van mijn familie te respecteren en de file te verwijderen van commonswiki.
- Kept, no valid reason to delete this public domain image, - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 19:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Om persoonlijke redenen. Hij is naaste familie en geen publiek bezit! Abigaïl47 (talk) 08:54, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
- Beste Abigaïl47, om in herhaling te vallen heeft geen enkele zin.
- Om de Adder te gedenken is een andere foto van deze M. Smits gebruikt. In literatuur over de Titanic staan ook foto's. Ik zou niet weten waarom er op een moment geen gedenkboek over de MH17 met foto's zou kunnen verschijnen. De privacywet gaat over levende personen. Groet, Lidewij (talk) 14:10, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Wat is het belang van Lidewij? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abigaïl47 (talk • contribs) 08:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Er is geen ander foto van Michiel Smits gebruikt in het artikel over de ramp met de Adder. Controleer dit gerust op de wikipedia pagina hierover. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abigaïl47 (talk • contribs) 08:26, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Er zijn genoeg zwaarwegende redenen te bedenken om geen foto`s te publiceren van geliefde personen na hun overlijden in het publieke domein. Volgens mij kan Lidewij dat zelf ook wel bedenken. Misschien kent ze zelf wel een geliefd overleden persoon waarvan ze geen foto`s op het internet heeft gepubliceerd en ook niet wil gaan doen om de juiste redenen. Anders kent ze misschien mensen in haar omgeving die haar dit kunnen uitleggen.
Mensen hebben het recht om vergeten te worden, ook op het internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abigaïl47 (talk • contribs) 11:33, 28 June 2020 (UTC) Gelukkig zijn er weinig mensen geïnteresseerd in een gesprek over mijn overleden familielid.
Wat is het algemeen belang dat Michiel Smits wordt vermeld op deze pagina? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abigaïl47 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Menke graag je reactie! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abigaïl47 (talk • contribs) 11:09, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Menke is niet meer actief op Commons en Wikipedia. Lidewij (talk) 13:32, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Abigaïl47, mijn hobby is genealogie en geschiedenis. Ik ben hier actief omdat ik voor vrije kennis en documentatie ben. Als genealoog ben ik juist actief, zodat mensen niet vergeten zullen worden. Binnen onze familie worden oa. oude foto's aan het archief gegeven. Het artikel over de Adder staat op mijn volglijst, alle wijzigingen komen bij mij langs. De foto van Michiel Smits (1852-1882) is hier opgenomen omdat hij op 22 jarige leeftijd de Ridder Militaire Willems-Orde kreeg en daarom was opgenomen in het boek van P.H.K. van Schendel, De Nederlandsche Ridderorden. 1891. Mvg, Lidewij (talk) 13:32, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Wie beheerd deze pagina dan?Abigaïl47 (talk) 13:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC) Lidewij kan jij het je voorstellen dat ik het niet fijn vind dat jij met mijn familie omgaat?Abigaïl47 (talk) 13:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Abigaïl47, na het uploaden (het vrijgeven) behoord de foto aan de gemeenschap van Commons. De moderatoren beheren hier. Abigaïl47, ik kan het me juist niet voorstellen. Het gaat over een ver familielid. Wanneer het om directe familie, zoals een kind of ouder, zou gaan kan ik me er nog iets bij voorstellen. De foto zit en blijft in het publieke domein, of hij nu in Commens staat op niet. Mvg, Lidewij (talk) 14:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Lidewij als jij het nou voor jouw familie doet, dan doe ik het voor mijn familie.Abigaïl47 (talk) 14:19, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Wat moet ik voor mijn familie doen?
- Wanneer er iets in het publieke domein staat of is, is er niets meer over te zeggen. Lidewij (talk) 14:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Abigaïl47, het is not done delen uit het overleg te verwijderen, nadat er op de onderdelen werd gereageerd. Lidewij (talk) 18:49, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Kept, no valid reason to delete this public domain image, (as above) - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 19:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
{{Duplicate|Baltijas_jūra_Kaltenē_-_panoramio.jpg|later upload}} Dāvis Kļaviņš (talk) 13:05, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, duplicate-processed. --Túrelio (talk) 19:17, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Copyright ShohagS (talk) 09:23, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
nothing much ShohagS (talk) 09:26, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
Copyright A. Shohag 13:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, copied from https://www.instagram.com/p/B3AQ5mdJBES/. --Túrelio (talk) 18:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
{{Duplicate|Melnsila_kempings_pie_jūras_-_panoramio.jpg|later upload}} Dāvis Kļaviņš (talk) 14:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, duplicate-processed. --Túrelio (talk) 19:19, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
{{Duplicate|Engures_osta_-_harbor_-_panoramio_(5).jpg|later upload}} Dāvis Kļaviņš (talk) 15:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, duplicate-processed. --Túrelio (talk) 19:20, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
{{Duplicate|Melnsila_kempings_pie_jūras.jpg|later upload}} Dāvis Kļaviņš (talk) 15:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, duplicate-processed. --Túrelio (talk) 19:21, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
{{Duplicate|2015_09_Engure_(64).jpg}} Dāvis Kļaviņš (talk) 16:22, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, duplicate-processed. --Túrelio (talk) 19:21, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
{{Duplicate|Engure_-_panoramio_(2).jpg|later upload}} Dāvis Kļaviņš (talk) 16:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, duplicate-processed. --Túrelio (talk) 19:22, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Wcam as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: [1] [2]
Converted to regular DR to allow for more research, as the provided hits are from 2017, whereas our upload is from 2016. -- Túrelio (talk) 19:04, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete @Túrelio: see this image from 2015. Also note that the uploaded image is a cropped version of the original (with the visual mark cropped out) so the linked ones cannot be taken from Commons. --Wcam (talk) 22:00, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, speedied after evidence was updated. --Túrelio (talk) 07:05, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
A person of no notability. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 22:34, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Speedy delete per CSD F10. --pandakekok9 03:21, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, speedied per oos. --Túrelio (talk) 07:31, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
A person of no notability. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 22:34, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per CSD F10. --pandakekok9 03:21, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, speedied per oos. --Túrelio (talk) 07:31, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
A person of no notability. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 22:34, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per CSD F10. --pandakekok9 03:21, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, speedied per oos. --Túrelio (talk) 07:29, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of the scope of the project (literally nothing is pictured). Andrei Romanenko (talk) 22:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Speedy delete Seems to qualify for CSD G1. --pandakekok9 03:23, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, speedied as test-image. --Túrelio (talk) 07:17, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
No permission from the source, even unknown artist are still COM:NETCOPYVIO A1Cafel (talk) 04:37, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete 20 upper 08:19, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:57, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
No notability, self-promotion (see the uploader's description). Andrei Romanenko (talk) 22:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Speedy delete Image is published on Unsplash after 5 June 2017, which means this image is not free. --pandakekok9 03:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, speedied as unfree. --Túrelio (talk) 07:18, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope: Blatent advert Headlock0225 (talk) 13:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, speedied as a mere advertisement. --Túrelio (talk) 20:23, 30 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, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Whatever just delete it. Eratomsen454 (talk) 09:12, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, speedied. --Túrelio (talk) 20:10, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Arundhanadi (talk · contribs)
[edit]Commons is not a personal photo album. Out of scope.
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 55.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 54.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 53.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 52.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 50.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 51.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 49.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 48.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 47.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 46.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 45.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 44.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 43.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 42.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 41.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 40.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 39.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 38.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 37.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 36.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 35.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 34.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 33.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 32.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 31.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 30.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 29.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 28.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 27.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 26.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 25.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 24.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 23.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi .jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 22.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 21.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 20.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 19.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 18.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 17.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 16.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 15.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 14.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 13.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 12.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 11.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 10.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 9.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 8.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 7.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 6.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 5.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 4.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 3.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 2.jpg
- File:Arun 2.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi.jpg
Minoraxtalk (formerly 大诺史) 06:25, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 12:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Arundhanadi (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of project scope. Personal images, not in use.
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 66.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 65.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 64.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 63.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 62.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 61.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 60.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 59.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 58.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 57.jpg
- File:Arun Singh Dhanadi 56.jpg
- File:Arun singh Dhanadi 3.jpg
- File:Arun singh Dhanadi 2.jpg
- File:Arun singh Dhanadi .jpg
— D Y O L F 77[Talk] 12:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 04:58, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
copyright ahuR ☘ 09:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by JGHowes at 00:19, 1 Juli 2020 UTC: Screenshot of non-free content (F3) --Krdbot 02:29, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Is this image within the Commons project scope? This seems to be something to advertise some event. Besides, there are some copyright issues. The background seems to be taken from some media repository, TinEye gives 40+ search results for this. Mosbatho (talk) 16:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Was used on a promotional page on en.wiki that was speedily deleted. This should be deleted as G10 IMO, and will tag as such. See the user's (User talk:QuicksSortSolution) other contributions. Spencer (talk) 20:30, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:CSD#f10. --DaB. (talk) 12:41, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Not own work, image from citify.eu Renata3 (talk) 23:54, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 14:28, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Low-quality chemical structure with opaque (grey) background & in small resolution. Have File:Skeletal formula of Pleiocarpamine.svg as high-quality vector replacement. Chem Sim 2001 (disc) 20:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. There are some overlapped bonds without a visual hint of front-to-back ordering as well. DMacks (talk) 03:17, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:33, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
No FOP in Italy.
- File:3 dimetrodonti.jpg
- File:4 plesiosauri.jpg
- File:Allosauro 2016.jpg
- File:Allosauro 2018.jpg
- File:Anatosauro 2013.jpg
- File:Apatosauro del parco della preistoria.jpg
- File:Australopiteco.jpg
- File:Brontosauro 2007.jpg
- File:Brontosauro 2018.jpg
- File:Diatryma 2007.jpg
- File:Dimetrodonti del parco della preistoria 01.jpg
- File:Dimetrodonti del parco della preistoria 02.jpg
- File:Edmontosauro 2016.jpg
- File:Edmontosauro 2018.jpg
- File:Eryops del parco della preistoria 01.jpg
- File:Eryops del parco della preistoria 02.jpg
- File:Eryops del parco della preistoria 03.jpg
- File:Eryops del parco della preistoria 04.jpg
- File:Gallimimo 2018.jpg
- File:Gallimimo Parco della preistoria 2007.jpg
- File:Gallimimo parco della preistoria 2013.jpg
- File:Gallimimo parco della preistoria 2016.jpg
- File:Gastornis del parco della preistoria.jpg
- File:Iguanodonte del parco della preistoria 01.jpg
- File:Iguanodonte del parco della preistoria 02.jpg
- File:Iguanodonte del parco della preistoria 03.jpg
- File:Macairodo e platibelodonte 2007.jpg
- File:Macairodo e platibelodonte 2013.jpg
- File:Machairodo e platibelodonte 2018.jpg
- File:Mammut lanoso 2007.jpg
- File:Nuovo t-rex.jpg
- File:Orso delle caverne 2007.jpg
- File:Orso delle caverne 2013.jpg
- File:Plesiosauri del parco della preistoria.jpg
- File:Plesiosauro 01.jpg
- File:Plesiosauro 02.jpg
- File:Plesiosauro 03.jpg
- File:Plesiosauro 04.jpg
- File:Proconsul 2007.jpg
- File:Pteranodonte 2007.jpg
- File:Pteranodonte 2013.jpg
- File:Pteranodonte 2016.jpg
- File:Pterigoto 2018.jpg
- File:Scolosauro del parco della preistoria 02.jpg
- File:Scolosauro del parco della preistoria 03.jpg
- File:Scolosauro del parco della preistoria 04.jpg
- File:Scolosauro del parco della preistoria.jpg
- File:Scutosauro e inostrancevia 01.jpg
- File:Scutosauro e inostrancevia 02.jpg
- File:Scutosauro e sauroctono 01.jpg
Yuraily Lic (talk) 07:24, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
- Delete No FOP in Italy. AshFriday (talk) 00:01, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Fitindia (talk) 11:22, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
No FOP in Italy.
- File:Coccosteo e cefalaspide 2007.jpg
- File:Scutosauro e sauroctono 02.jpg
- File:Smilodonte del parco della preistoria.jpg
- File:Stegosauro del parco della preistoria 02.jpg
- File:Stegosauro del parco della preistoria 03.jpg
- File:Stegosauro del parco della preistoria 04.jpg
- File:Stegosauro del Parco della Preistoria.jpg
- File:Stiracosauro 2013.jpg
- File:Stiracosauro 2016.jpg
- File:Stiracosauro Parco della Preistoria 2007.jpg
- File:Tarbosauro del parco della preistoria 01.jpg
- File:Tarbosauro del parco della preistoria 02.jpg
- File:Tarbosauro del parco della preistoria 03.jpg
- File:Ticinosuco.jpg
- File:Tirannosauro 2007.jpg
- File:Tirannosauro 2016.jpg
- File:Tirannosauro del parco della preistoria 2018.jpg
- File:Titanosauro Tito.jpg
- File:Triceratopo 2007.jpg
- File:Triceratopo 2016.jpg
- File:Triceratopo 2018.jpg
- File:Uomo di Cro-Magnon.jpg
- File:Uomo di Neanderthal 2007.jpg
- File:Uomo di Neanderthal con il maiale.jpg
- File:Uomo di Neanderthal con la legna.jpg
- File:Velociraptor 2018.jpg
- File:Velociraptor parco della preistoria 1.jpg
- File:Velociraptor parco della preistoria 2.jpg
Yuraily Lic (talk) 07:39, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
- Delete No FOP in Italy. AshFriday (talk) 00:03, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Fitindia (talk) 11:32, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
No FOP in Italy.
- File:Allosauro del parco della preistoria 01.jpg
- File:Allosauro del parco della preistoria 02.jpg
- File:Allosauro del parco della preistoria 03.jpg
- File:Brontosauro Parco della preistoria.jpg
- File:Smilodonte parco della preistoria.jpg
- File:Tirannosauro parco della preistoria 01.jpg
- File:Tirannosauro parco della preistoria 02.jpg
- File:Tirannosauro parco della preistoria 03.jpg
- File:Tirannosauro parco della preistoria 04.jpg
Yuraily Lic (talk) 04:31, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 04:59, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
low quality icons, unused, uncategorized, can be easily re-created, probably out of scope.
- File:Romance -M.png
- File:Past accident.png
- File:New character mark.png
- File:New Character.png
- File:Plot-MK12.png
- File:Plot Bo 21.png
Estopedist1 (talk) 07:40, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:00, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Partners Statue at Disneyland
[edit]No FoP in USA. The statue is not DM and is part of the whole composition in each images.
- File:David at the hub (273508941).jpg
- File:Disneyland park - Anaheim Los Angeles California USA (9893926315) (3).jpg
- File:Disneyland park - Anaheim Los Angeles California USA (9894127805) (3).jpg
- File:Disneyland park - Anaheim Los Angeles California USA (9894147035).jpg
- File:Disneyland park - Anaheim Los Angeles California USA (9894153056) (2).jpg
- File:Disneyland park - Anaheim Los Angeles California USA (9894159426).jpg
- File:Disneyland park - Anaheim Los Angeles California USA (9894618593) (2).jpg
- File:Disneyland Walt Disney statue.JPG
- File:Disneyland-Partners statue.jpg
- File:Partner statue fireworks (9113948546).jpg
- File:Sleeping Beauty Castle (21445684962).jpg
- File:Walt Disney (14605619769).jpg
Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:36, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 12:35, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:Partners Statue at Disneyland
[edit]No FoP in US for artworks.
Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:02, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Not against a statue of a famous racist and anti-semite getting toppled from Commons. Why Disney wants him in the centre of their park, remains a mystery. --Fæ (talk) 10:13, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:45, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 10:07, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Partners Statue
[edit]COM:DW of copyrighted works.
- File:Disneyland - panoramio (4).jpg - No FoP in France.
- File:Walt Disney e Topolino a Disneyland Paris.jpg - No FoP in France.
- File:Walt Disney Studios Park - panoramio (4).jpg - No FoP in France.
- File:Walt, Mickey, and the Castle - panoramio.jpg - No FoP in US.
Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Addition,
--Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Partners Statue
[edit]No FOP in the US. See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Partners Statue at Magic Kingdom & Commons:Deletion requests/File:"Partners"- Taken by Mackenzie Conway.jpg
Elisfkc (talk) 16:33, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 19:30, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope .Private image collections SCP-2000 11:25, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:47, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by JasonMatthewC (talk · contribs)
[edit]A number of these photos are sourced from instagram. PCP for the rest, not own work and need permission
- File:Erka.sby.8.png
- File:Erka.sby.6.jpg
- File:Erka.sby3.jpg
- File:Erka.sby.7.jpg
- File:Erka.sby.5.jpg
- File:Erka.sby.4.jpg
- File:Erka.sby2.jpg
- File:Media3-sinlui.jpg
- File:V-hall-sinlui.jpg
- File:Labkom-A-sinlui.jpg
- File:Kelas-Gedung-C-sinlui.jpg
- File:Upacara-sinlui.jpg
- File:Bangsal-sinlui.jpg
- File:Side-view-sinlui.jpg
- File:Patung-maria-sinlui.jpg
- File:Front-view-sinlui.jpg
- File:Old-mural-sinlui.jpg
- File:Logo-smak-stlouis1-resmi.png
- File:Tangga Besar Gedung A.jpg
- File:Gedung WW dari area Pohon Cinta.jpg
Gbawden (talk) 11:58, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 12:03, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:08, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
LEGO sculptures in Legoland California. COM:TOYS, and No FoP in US for artworks. See also Com:Deletion requests/Files in Category:LEGO sculptures in Legoland California.
- File:Knights' Tournament Dragon (3838046465).jpg
- File:Lego Dragon (16453603876).jpg
- File:Legoland California (5473689987).jpg
- File:Legoland Star Wars (6042327909).jpg
- File:Red Dragon (774284823).jpg
Yuraily Lic (talk) 12:05, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support deletion per above reasoning. Cheers, Mliu92 (talk) 17:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:06, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Arioferdows (talk · contribs)
[edit]Some taken from Insta per source, others claimed as own work but no exif - PCP
- File:آب انبار فاضل خانی سه قلعه.jpg
- File:Rahi House.jpg
- File:آب انبار بی بی حسین خان.jpg
- File:Sidi Mosque.jpg
- File:حوض انبار سیدی فردوس.jpg
- File:Tomb of the Mirzas.jpg
- File:Kindergarten in Ferdows 1966.jpg
- File:Ferdows pistachio.jpg
- File:Ressai Home in ferdows city.jpg
- File:Desert shah in Ferdows.jpg
- File:Rubat khoshab ferdows6.jpg
- File:Rubat khoshab ferdows5.jpg
- File:Rubat khoshab ferdows4.jpg
- File:Rubat khoshab ferdows.jpg
- File:Rubat khoshab ferdows2.jpg
- File:Rubat khoshab ferdows1.jpg
- File:Tughi Ferdowsi Food.jpg
- File:Qanat baladeh.jpg
- File:Baghestan ferdows.jpg
- File:A field in the city of Ferdows.jpg
- File:Sorond south khorasan.jpg
- File:Old neighborhoods of Mashhad.jpg
- File:Historic citadel in Ferdows.jpg
- File:Ferdowsi High School in Ferdows.jpg
- File:محمد حسین فاضل تونی.jpg
- File:پایاب تاریخی تون.jpg
- File:Robat-e Shoor.jpg
- File:Anarestanak.jpg
- File:Toon map.jpg
- File:Map of persia 1932.jpg
- File:Ezqand.jpg
- File:مزار خواجه عبدالرشید.jpg
- File:Gastaj.jpg
- File:Nasir Khusraw Travelogue.jpg
- File:Safavid Empire Map by Kâtip Çelebi.jpg
- File:Ferdows city.jpg
- File:Eslamiyeh.jpg
- File:Sheikh's Tomb Anduqani.jpg
- File:Warehouse Anduqan1.jpg
- File:Warehouse Anduqan.jpg
- File:Celebration sadeh Anduqan.jpg
- File:Anduqan1.jpg
- File:Ferdows Municipality.png
- File:Golbahar Airport.png
- File:Tomp in golbahar.jpg
- File:Park in golbahar.jpg
- File:Mosque in golbahar.jpg
- File:Statue of Ibn Sina in golbahar.jpg
- File:Golbahar city.jpg
- File:Tomb in golbahar.jpg
- File:Lake City of golbahar.jpg
- File:LOGO GHOLBAHAR.jpg
- File:Pic of toon city.png
- File:Ferdows Congregation Mosque 2.png
- File:Palond desert.png
- File:Sardashat The Neighbourhood.png
- File:Charma.png
- File:Haruniyeh1.jpg
- File:Crocus sativus in Ferdows county.png
- File:Ferdows Hole in the Rock.png
- File:Emad Nezam Hotel.png
- File:Ferdos Religious School4.png
- File:Ferdows Congregation Mosque 1.png
- File:1امامزاده محمد و ابراهیم فردوس.png
- File:امامزاده محمد و ابراهیم فردوس.png
- File:Ferdows Anthropology Museum2.png
- File:Ferdows Anthropology Museum1.png
- File:Ferdos Religious School3.png
- File:Ferdows Congregation Mosque1.png
- File:Qanat Baladeh Ferdows.png
- File:Interior view of Qalanat Baladeh.png
- File:One of the inputs Kariz Baldeh.png
- File:Historical mosque in Ferdows city(toon city) 3.png
- File:Historical mosque in Ferdows city(toon city) 2.png
- File:Historical mosque in Ferdows city(toon city) 1.png
- File:ایوان مسجد جامع تون.png
- File:آب انبار خانکوک.png
- File:نخل فردوس٣.png
- File:نخل فردوس.png
- File:نخل فردوس٢.png
- File:نخل فردوس ١.png
- File:خانه آزاد.png
- File:منزل معزی.png
- File:آبگرم معدنی فردوس.png
- File:باغستان پایین فردوس.png
- File:سد مهوید.png
- File:مهوید.png
- File:بیدسکان.png
- File:امامزاده محمد و امامزاده ابراهیم فردوس.png
- File:کریمو.png
- File:خورزاد.png
- File:امرودکان.png
- File:بیدسگان.png
- File:گستج.png
- File:Imam Reza Stadium of Mashhad.jpg
- File:باغستان فردوس.png
- File:مسجد تاریخی کوشک فردوس.png
- File:سفر شاه به شهر فردوس پس از زلزله.jpg
- File:زلزله سال ۱۳۴۷ شهر فردوس.jpg
- File:Haji abdollah Mosque.jpg
Gbawden (talk) 12:08, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:26, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
मराठी सेलिब्रिटी अधिकृत पेजची सुरवात १८ एप्रिल २०१९ पासून झाली.
मराठी मनोरंजन क्षेत्रावर आणि कलाकारांवर जीवापाड प्रेम करणाऱ्या रसिकांसाठी…
Marathi celebrity official is an online platform for the promotion of Marathi entertainment content.
The Page and website is updated daily on a real time basis with news snippets, celebrity interviews, special features, movie reviews, music reviews and a lot of desktop downloadable's.
Files uploaded by Marathi celebrity official (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, no apparent encyclopedic value
Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:48, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:52, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:02, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:53, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Emirates Dial (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:05, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:53, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:08, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:11, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope/ No educational value Harsh 2580 (talk) 14:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete I agree with nom; and as the girl is not nude hope there will not be a storm of objections. --E4024 (talk) 14:19, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:56, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Abel Tiprasa (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagrams. Should be in SVG if useful.
- File:Sample of Khorongma script.png
- File:Sample Kokborok script.png
- File:Kokborok characters.png
- File:Kokborok character(Aa).png
- File:Kokborok character(E).png
- File:Kokborok character(Uo).png
- File:Kokborok character(Ua).png
- File:Kokborok script or Tipra script2.jpg
- File:Kokborok script or Tipra script.gif
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:33, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:19, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:56, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:21, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:56, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:33, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:57, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Uwe Kleins (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: what new could be added to existing collection of explicit materials?
- File:Nackt3.jpg
- File:Handjob4.jpg
- File:Nackt von hinten.jpg
- File:Blasen2.jpg
- File:Fellatio-gay.jpg
- File:Blasen.ogv
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:04, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Uwe Kleins (talk · contribs)
[edit]COM:NUDITY, nothing we don’t already have
- File:Nur Nackt.jpg
- File:Nackt Mann Couch.jpg
- File:Nackter Mann von hinten.jpg
- File:Nackter Mann.jpg
- File:Nackt uwe.jpg
- File:Nackt wiki2.jpg
- File:Nackt wiki.jpg
- File:Nackt Mann.jpg
Dronebogus (talk) 23:26, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:53, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Uwe Kleins (talk · contribs)
[edit]COM:PORN, nothing we don’t already have
- File:Uwe kleins.jpg
- File:Handjob uwe.jpg
- File:Cockring uwe.jpg
- File:Uwe blow wiki.jpg
- File:Blowjob uwe.jpg
- File:Blasen 4.jpg
- File:Blasen 2.jpg
- File:Handarbeit 2.jpg
- File:Handarbeit Phallus.jpg
- File:Blowjob2.jpg
- File:Blowjob gay.jpg
Dronebogus (talk) 23:28, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 03:09, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Uwe Kleins (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unremarkable amateur porn
Dronebogus (talk) 01:24, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:26, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Uwe Kleins (talk · contribs)
[edit]More WP:PORN
Dronebogus (talk) 21:20, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Already deleted by The Squirrel Conspiracy.(non-admin closure)--A1Cafel (talk) 02:54, 11 May 2023 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from advertisement. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:58, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gangayan Langit (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.
- File:Dusun Tuaran.jpg
- File:Si Gunting.jpg
- File:Dusun Warrior.jpg
- File:Dusun Liwan dari Randagong.jpg
- File:Baju Sinipak Dusun Tindal.jpg
- File:Sinombiyaka Dusun Liwan Tambunan.jpg
- File:Gintuak from Kadamaian, 1938.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:11, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:58, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gangayan Langit (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Dusun Kuizou.jpg
- File:Gantung Sorili.webp
- File:Watu Datu Pulang.jpg
- File:Tarian Sumayau.jpg
- File:Dusun grave aka Kuburan Dusun dengan pondok.jpg
- File:Dusun Liwan.jpg
- File:(1) Pesta Nunuk Ragang 2010 ditag di.jpg
- File:Dusun Lotud of Tuaran.jpg
- File:Dusun Lotud.jpg
- File:Gayang Dusun, Dusun weapons.jpg
- File:Gayang Dusun.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:13, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:36, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Personal photos for non-wikipedian - out of scope --Alaa :)..! 15:13, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:59, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Anisfreepic (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used or used in unapproved draft.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:17, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:59, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:19, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:00, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rkgovindarajan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:28, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:01, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rkgovindarajan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:R.k govindrajan with ustad amzad ali khan saheb.jpg
- File:RK.Govindarajan.jpg
- File:Releases by former president Dr. Shankar Byal Sharma.jpg
- File:Air 2016.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:54, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 09:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:01, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by راغب بوتمجت (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:01, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Banepawiki (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
- File:Kri promo.jpg
- File:Niti-shah-ramp-model-.jpg
- File:Samagri-rajya-laxmi-shah.jpg
- File:Baglung Bazar.jpg
- File:Pokhara-valley-trek.jpg
- File:Pokhara Stadium.jpg
- File:PK 77.jpg
- File:Shrestha's look for Movie Xira.jpg
- File:Namrata Shrestha profile.jpg
- File:Araniko Highway through Banepa.png
- File:Overlooking Banepa Valley during the Hike.jpg
- File:Aerial View of Kathmandu city.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:40, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:37, 5 July 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, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:02, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:44, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:02, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Artwork on record is artistic and copyrightable. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 15:59, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:02, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Personal photos for non-wikipedian - out of scope
- File:Mahmood Marzooq Perfume.jpg
- File:Mahmood Marzooq Studio Team.jpg
- File:Mahmood Marzooq Exhibitions Opening.jpg
- File:Mahmood Marzooq 2.jpg
- File:Mahmood Marzooq.jpg
--Alaa :)..! 15:59, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:04, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:03, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:05, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:03, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:03, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:05, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:13, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:05, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:05, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:19, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:05, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Not own work, copied from skyscrapercity.com Renata3 (talk) 23:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Érico at 14:27, 4 Juli 2020 UTC: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing --Krdbot 02:27, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
logo af a music band whose article was cancelled on en.wikipedia Pippobuono (talk) 16:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
own work? I do'nt believe Adelfrank (talk) 16:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:36, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
own work? I do'nt believe Adelfrank (talk) 16:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:36, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
own work? I do'nt believe Adelfrank (talk) 16:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:36, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:58, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 09:19, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of project scope senseless image. MBH 16:59, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:33, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
This file is unlikely to be own work or freely licensed, as it has been previously published [3] and [4] Vycl1994 (talk) 17:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:33, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
This file is unlikely to be freely licensed or own work, as it has been previously published [5] Vycl1994 (talk) 17:44, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope/ No educational value Harsh 2580 (talk) 18:27, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 09:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope/ No educational value Harsh 2580 (talk) 18:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 09:20, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sadeastwood (talk · contribs)
[edit]Likely to be cover art or something. Unlikely to be own work by the uploader.
Stefan2 (talk) 22:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:14, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
http://jovenesactricesdelmomento.blogspot.com/2012/09/entrevista-andrea-dueso.html E4024 (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:11, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Looks as if this is from a professional photoshoot. Lack of camera details suggest a scan and probably infringement of copyright Timtrent (talk) 23:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. --Gbawden (talk) 09:10, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Unusable personal photo Adelfrank (talk) 23:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Decent photo, can be used. --Gbawden (talk) 09:11, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Unusable personal photo Adelfrank (talk) 23:50, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:09, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Not own work, image from google Renata3 (talk) 23:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:09, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Complex logos can be in Commons only with OTRS-permission. Taivo (talk) 06:56, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:07, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Small photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Depicted people are probably non-notable, even country is unknown. Out of project scope, copyright violation is possible as well. Taivo (talk) 16:07, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:07, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
<PA removed> Just some random photo <PA removed>? 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:19, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Tangent discussion unrelated to DR. Ignore.
|
|---|
|
That's racist. User:The SVG Effect 20:46, 27 June 2020
Uh, technically, it's racism. User:The SVG Effect 21:08, 27 June 2020 |
Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:29, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Delete This is the picture of an OoS person uploaded by a random visitor. (Closing Admin: Please also strike or remove the rude words at the nomination. I did so in another DR by this IP.) E4024 (talk) 01:34, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Comment The subject on the photo could be Ruben Storck, which has a dewiki article. However, it's not yet confirmed by dewiki reviewers, so I'm going to be neutral on this one for now. pandakekok9 01:54, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Is Ruben Storck also known as Ruben Meiller? If they look like each other than maybe they can use the image of Ruben Meiller at the article of Ruben Storck... E4024 (talk) 02:00, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- That's what I thought too. As I said above, it's not yet confirmed by dewiki's pending reviewers, so I wouldn't add the image there yet. And I'm not sure if anyone noticed, but the name in the author field in the EXIF data is different from the uploader's username. But I will AGF there and assume that the uploader's username is just a pseudonym of "Rolf Schmitt". After all, there are no similar images to be found in Google, so I'd assume this is own work. pandakekok9 02:26, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- The person in the image looked so OoS to me that I did not examine the EXIF. Now you are telling me this is not even an "own work". Delete twice in this case. E4024 (talk) 02:31, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- You misunderstood what I said. I assume this is own work, because there aren't any similar images to be found on Google, which means this is a unique photo. "Rolf Schmitt" may as well just be the real name of the uploader. The only thing that's keeping me from !voting keep is the scope problem. pandakekok9 05:26, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- The person in the image looked so OoS to me that I did not examine the EXIF. Now you are telling me this is not even an "own work". Delete twice in this case. E4024 (talk) 02:31, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- That's what I thought too. As I said above, it's not yet confirmed by dewiki's pending reviewers, so I wouldn't add the image there yet. And I'm not sure if anyone noticed, but the name in the author field in the EXIF data is different from the uploader's username. But I will AGF there and assume that the uploader's username is just a pseudonym of "Rolf Schmitt". After all, there are no similar images to be found in Google, so I'd assume this is own work. pandakekok9 02:26, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete The subject of the photo appears to be a semi-notable cellist from Hamburg or training in Hamburg. The uploader may be Anke Dieterle from Akademie Hamburg. She is unlikely to also be Rolf Schmitt, the person named in the EXIF as copyright holder. I think there is too much unknown to assume this file is correctly licensed. FredWalsh (talk) 07:02, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per FredWalsh. Nice research! --pandakekok9 08:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per FredWalsh. It may or may not be out of scope, but the possibility of copyright violation supports the deletion. --Ahmadtalk 11:50, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The restored file will be deleted again. 2600:1702:10D1:4E0:38DD:B6EB:C9CA:3EAF 01:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep No valid reason? Tm (talk) 02:35, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. (non-admin closure) --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 16:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Restored file will be deleted again. Germagsam221331 (talk) 16:41, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Achim (talk) 17:34, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Media from Israeli Ministry of Health are under the fair use term. Unfortunately, fair use claims are not allowed on Commons A1Cafel (talk) 04:03, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- It is not fair use, it is public domain. See File talk:Yaakov Litzman and Moshe Bar Siman Tov.jpg for details. דוד שי (talk) 04:27, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. This file alredy passed review by Túrelio that removed Copyvio template per dicussion in the files talk page. -- Geagea (talk) 08:08, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per discussions. (non-admin closure) --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 16:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Media from Israeli Ministry of Health are under the fair use term. Unfortunately, fair use claims are not allowed on Commons A1Cafel (talk) 04:03, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- It is not fair use, it is public domain. See File talk:Yaakov Litzman and Moshe Bar Siman Tov.jpg for details. דוד שי (talk) 04:26, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per discussions. (non-admin closure) --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 16:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Media from Israeli Ministry of Health are under the fair use term. Unfortunately, fair use claims are not allowed on Commons A1Cafel (talk) 04:03, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- It is not fair use, it is public domain. See File talk:Yaakov Litzman and Moshe Bar Siman Tov.jpg for details. דוד שי (talk) 04:22, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per discussions. (non-admin closure) --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 16:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by A1Cafel as Dw no source since (dw no source since). -- Geagea (talk) 08:29, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. According to §6 of the Israeli Copyright Law, 5768-2007: Notwithstanding the provisions of section 4, copyright shall not subsist in statutes, regulations, Knesset Protocols and judicial decisions of the courts or of any other government entities having judicial authority according to law. the link in the source fiel lead to the official regulation of the Israeli govroment which the file was taken from. -- Geagea (talk) 08:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep – Fuzzy – 09:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- This image was mistakenly tagged by A1Cafel as an "image within an image" derivative work. It was created that way and was published that way in the Reshumot. – Fuzzy – 09:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. (non-admin closure) --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 16:36, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
How can this be released under the terms of {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}} if the author appears to be unknown? The copyright status remains uncertain and we would need proof for a publication date of 1920 and more research before we can actually assume that this postcard has been published anonymously. A scan of the frontpage of this postcard could be helpful with informations about the publisher etc. See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Michaelaleo for related files which were already deleted. AFBorchert (talk) 09:31, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete unclear copyright status. Buidhe (talk) 07:55, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Gestumblindi (talk) 19:18, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Es gibt ein viel besseres Bild, siehe https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Weinbergkirche_Pillnitz_Portal.jpg GerritR (talk) 09:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- behalten das Foto ist von 1986. Es hat einen dokumentarischen Wert. - - Z thomas 10:23, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ich erlaube die Löschung meines betreffenden Fotos, gebe aber zu bedenken: Es wäre wohl der Anfang vom Ende von Wikimedia, wenn der informelle, der dokumentarische Wert von Abbildungen an deren "Schönheit" gemessen würde, anstatt an der Aussage, "wie sah was wann aus". Die Aussage von diesem Bild ist "Das Adelswappen wurde auch in der DDR-Zeit nicht abgehackt, was woanders durchaus der Fall war". Das bezeugt dieses Foto trotz seiner leichten Unschärfe. --Jörg Blobelt (talk) 11:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Na dann besser nicht löschen. Bitte den Fall als erledigt betrachten.--GerritR (talk) 20:00, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ganz Unrecht hat der GerritR ja auch nicht. Deshalb mein Kompromißvoschlag: Um das leidige, zweifellos fotografisch schlechte Bild vom Anfang der Bilderseite von der berümten Weinbergkirche zu verbannen (ohne es zu löschen), schlage ich vor, den betr. Dateinamen im Satzbau meines Fotos umzustellen auf:
- Na dann besser nicht löschen. Bitte den Fall als erledigt betrachten.--GerritR (talk) 20:00, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ich erlaube die Löschung meines betreffenden Fotos, gebe aber zu bedenken: Es wäre wohl der Anfang vom Ende von Wikimedia, wenn der informelle, der dokumentarische Wert von Abbildungen an deren "Schönheit" gemessen würde, anstatt an der Aussage, "wie sah was wann aus". Die Aussage von diesem Bild ist "Das Adelswappen wurde auch in der DDR-Zeit nicht abgehackt, was woanders durchaus der Fall war". Das bezeugt dieses Foto trotz seiner leichten Unschärfe. --Jörg Blobelt (talk) 11:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Weinbergkirche Dresden-Pillnitz 19860525103NR
Damit würde diese Bild "nacht hinten" verschwinden. Zu dieser Dateinamensänderung gebe ich in Einzelfall meine ausdrücklich Erlaubnis, kann das aber nicht selbst. Wer macht das? Danke. --Jörg Blobelt (talk) 18:42, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Um die Position in der Reihenfolge ging es mir bei meinem Löschantrag gar nicht. Aber wenn Du das Bild umbenennen lassen willst, kann man einen entsprechenden Antrag stellen, Siehe Commons:File_renaming. Halte ich aber für nicht nötig.--GerritR (talk) 20:23, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- ich kann es morgen früh verschieben. Oder wir geben dem Foto einen sortierschlüssel. Das mach ich gleich mal. Gute Nacht --Z thomas 20:34, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Das Bild zeigt den Zustand 1986 und ist daher trotz der bescheidenen Qualität von historischem Wert. Umbenannt werden könnte es natürlich, das ist aber ein anderes Thema, und ich möchte zu bedenken geben, dass wir eigentlich nicht danach kategorisieren, was "schön" ist (man hätte so auch ständig damit zu tun, "weniger schöne" Bilder in Kategorien nach hinten zu sortieren, als ob wir sonst nicht genug zu tun haben hier...). --Gestumblindi (talk) 19:24, 6 July 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) 14:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: no license. --ƏXPLICIT 11:40, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Wikiped201820 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Image taken from Facebook, no evidence of permission
Converted to regular DR, as no evidence for copyvio has been povided. -- Túrelio (talk) 13:23, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
I have just accepted permission for “File:המרפסת_של_מוסללה_The_Terrace_of_Muslala.jpg” under ticket:2020062810002423. -- Geagea (talk) 07:27, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per OTRS permmition. -- Geagea (talk) 07:28, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by A1Cafel as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://globalstudies-masters.eu/news-blog/emgs-update-wintersemester/
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as external hit seems to be from May 2020, thereby later than our upload AND of lower resolution[6] than our upload. So, the "hit" might even be an undeclared re-use of our image. -- Túrelio (talk) 13:32, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Same "problem" with File:Student during Coronavirus in Mexico (cropped).jpg.
- Túrelio, This file was taken by me, this page which you are citing in question is using my file without my consent. I took this picture on April 2020, and I uploaded it to commons, the page you are citing is talking about stuff from June 2020, this photo is by myself and not uploaded as a copyvio. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 22:03, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- This files were taken by me, I already made a response to the commos e-mail sending them my prove of being the owner. Hope this can be solved fast. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 22:35, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Ticket:2020070110000081 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 16:00, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Comment OTRS agent (verify): ºwe've received Ticket: regarding File:Student_during_Coronavirus_in_Mexico_(cropped).jpg, File:Student_during_Coronavirus_in_Mexico.jpg and File:Student_during_Coronavirus_in_Mexico_(2).jpg. The subject could recreate the files with more and less light, in similar circumstances of the files in DR. These new files have got EXIF and reasonabily we can assume it's the same person of the photos in DR. So: we can accept the permission and close the DR, or delete these files and upload the new, with EXIF ones and grant permission for them. I've never handle a case like this, so I'll do what you think it's best. What do you suggest, @Túrelio? Regards. --Ganímedes (talk) 21:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Ganimedes: as I trust you OTRS guys, both options are possible. If the photographer prefers to have the images slightly retouched (if I understood you correctly), he could simply re-upload the retouched images over the existing ones as a new version. I (or anybody) could then (if the uploader wants that) delete the initially uploaded version, so that only the retouched one remains; this way the filenames were preserved. --Túrelio (talk) 08:17, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
- More than retouched it's like a re-creation (a new file in the same conditions rebuilding the scene). --Ganímedes (talk) 14:37, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, well if theres a possibility of keeping the ones I uploaded first, that would be awesome, if not, i can upload the new existing ones over the current ones. But my personal choice is to keep the existing ones, I have already prove the ownership of them. What would be better? Túrelio, Ganímedes? TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 04:40, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- Sure. I would only ask @Ganimedes to "finalize" the ticket that has already been put on the first image. --Túrelio (talk) 06:35, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, well if theres a possibility of keeping the ones I uploaded first, that would be awesome, if not, i can upload the new existing ones over the current ones. But my personal choice is to keep the existing ones, I have already prove the ownership of them. What would be better? Túrelio, Ganímedes? TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 04:40, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- More than retouched it's like a re-creation (a new file in the same conditions rebuilding the scene). --Ganímedes (talk) 14:37, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Even when the files are not exact copies, the background, the details on the computer (colour, position, even some stripes in the cover) and specially the subject (same eyes, cloth, hair colour, hair cut, etc) it's the same to me, so I believe we can accept the original files with a good margin of security. --Ganímedes (talk) 11:57, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- Keep I agree that it is very likely that the person that uploaded the files and sent the permission is the photographer. Instead of us discussing which file we would allow here I think we should let the uploader (@TheBellaTwins1445: ) decide. --MGA73 (talk) 12:25, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- Ok. --Ganímedes (talk) 14:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Comment User has been blocked indefinitely. --Ganímedes (talk) 01:43, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no consensus to delete. Looking at the OTRS ticket i found that the uploader is VERY LIKELY the author. No reasonable doubt in this case, IMO. --Ankry (talk) 17:03, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Low res, higher res found at [7][8] --Baycrest (Talk) 16:52, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 08:52, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
Low res, higher res found at [9][10] --Baycrest (Talk) 16:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 10:07, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
unused and uncategorised file. Commons is not private media repository. Only (remaining) uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:33, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:58, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused maps of questionable notability.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:28, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- @EugeneZelenko: Within scope – results of Smer political party per district in yesterday's parliamentary election in Slovakia, although they are functional duplicates of in my opinion superior File:2020 nrsr smer.svg. The visualisation (sans the logos) comes from the website of the Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic but I am not sure what is their licensing policy. So the vague filenames, nonsense descriptions and false own work claims on this and other uploader's files are more of an issue.--TFerenczy (talk) 19:35, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
Deleted, there exists a better file:2020 nrsr smer.svg. Taivo (talk) 16:19, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
COM:DW of https://hnonline.sk/parlamentne-volby-2020/2101180-preco-to-tym-dochodcom-do-psej-matere-zavidite-fico-sa-v-debate-dostal-do-roztrzky-s-moderatorom
Patrick Rogel (talk) 20:41, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted, recreation of content deleted as copyvio. Taivo (talk) 09:04, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own works, low resolution, no metadata, PNG file type -> probably screenshots from videos. Also see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fico young.png, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fico 2020.png and user's talk page with many notifications.
- File:Designate prime minister Igor Matovic 2.png
- File:Designate prime minister Igor Matovic.png
- File:Igor Matovič slovak prime minister.png
Harold (talk) 08:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted, Jurajec was blocked for a month due to copyvios (second block). Taivo (talk) 10:08, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
unused and uncategorised file. Commons is not private media repository. Only (remaining) uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 09:50, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:07, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
tbe public domain tag is false. this is a work of art of a well known artist, and it does not contain "simple geometric shapes" Altenmann (talk) 21:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:32, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
1. This is a copy of file created by me – the uploader falsely claims it as his own work. 2. Thus, this image should be deleted per nomination as previously: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Toporzeł.svg. Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 14:48, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:18, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
As before. False claims of copyright. Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 21:19, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
- So, I have to give credit to Stanisław Szukalski? He is the guy who made the emblem in the first place. RootOfAllLight (talk) 16:14, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Reupload of deleted content with a copyrigt. --Yann (talk) 10:06, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
Derechos de autor, copyright 181.94.230.51 22:23, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:30, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Homo sapiens
[edit]These appear to be unused userphotos and/or unused photos of unidentified people, some of them with Facebook EXIF and one with a Facebook file name. Out of project scope.
- File:6176 100303349981783 100000063547665 5612 3892443 n.jpg
- File:Awais Raza Hassan.jpeg
- File:Burak Türk.jpg
- File:Homo sapiens in a coffee shop.jpg
- File:Imtiyaz (16).jpg
- File:Pofile Picture of Nebiyu.jpg
- File:Profil 3.jpg
- File:Venkat Medasani.jpg
Stefan2 (talk) 17:41, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 01:36, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:Homo sapiens
[edit]Out of scope: unused photos of people of unknown notability.
Stefan2 (talk) 22:26, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- IMHO "delete the first one" because it is a selfie and this is not social media. As regards the cute kid, Amiya's father (or uncle, I don't know) uploaded three pics of the girl. Let us "keep this image" at Category:Girls of India and let's delete the other two. I will DR them in a minute. --E4024 (talk) 22:35, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Indeed looking at the pic of Adrian Gaithuma again, I see a very sympathetic face, which is quite atypical and could be good to keep at Category:Adolescent boys (in Africa). Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 05:25, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - also grabbed from Facebook. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:29, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
OoS. Please see Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Homo sapiens E4024 (talk) 22:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:28, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
OoS. See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Homo sapiens. If you delete that file please do not delete this one. Quite representative of a part of Indian kids. E4024 (talk) 22:40, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:28, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
We have a host of paintings of Russian artist Maxim Naumov, but I imagine we need some sort of permission to use them. Do we have it? If not please use the OTRS system and let's keep the beautiful paintings. I DR'ed one of the few I liked less than the others. E4024 (talk) 22:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:28, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Seems like copyrighted screenshot. I did not find CC-BY-SA-4.0 license on source site. Taivo (talk) 08:05, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per above. --SCP-2000 08:15, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:26, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Unused personal photo. Solomon203 (talk) 05:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 21:38, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
low quality image with generic uninformative title and no description or information about what it is of (it certainly isn't what it's been categorised as). Little to no educational value. Grutness (talk) 06:42, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 21:39, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Advertising In twilight (talk) 07:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 21:41, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Advertising In twilight (talk) 07:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 21:42, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Advertising In twilight (talk) 07:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 21:42, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
unused and uncategorised file. Commons is not private media repository. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 21:46, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Unused selfie TFerenczy (talk) 08:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 21:48, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Unused selfie TFerenczy (talk) 08:25, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 21:50, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. By the way, mirror of File:Rerererererereeeeee.jpg, which is used on a user page of a user with two edits and could also be deleted. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:32, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 23:04, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Well, I am sorry for that but I think this file may be outside the project scope of Wikimedia Commons. There is obviously no Wikimedia project that uses this image and there are also some copyright issues. The photograph in the upper part can be found on various internet source and higher resoluted versions which are older than this upload are widely available. Mosbatho (talk) 12:04, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: as an advertisement. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 23:11, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 23:20, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
This photograph is very likely not the uploader's own work. The same photograph can be easily be found in the internet in higher resolutions. Mosbatho (talk) 16:08, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violation, found elsewhere on the web and unlikely to be own work (F1). --Эlcobbola talk 19:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
I didn't comprehend the ramifications of my work being used, worldwide without my specific permission. I was deeply depressed when I OK'd the photos. I also realize now that it was a mistake to allow photos of my son or family and friends in wikimedia commons. I've also been contacted by horse owners over the years that are unhappy about their photos being in wikimedia and I'm worried about being sued. I am happy to accomodate the editors and volunteers in any way I can to facilitate this request.abounaderphotoAbounaderphoto (talk) 17:02, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: CC licenses are irrevocable. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:22, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
This deserves more discussion, in light of Commons:Village pump/Proposals#Accept files published by the copyright holder with a Public Domain Mark. 1) Is this an official Flickr account of Nestlé? It's not linked to from any official Nestlé website that I can see, but this Mother Jones article and this press release appears to endorse the legitimacy of the account, so we're probably OK here. 2) Do we accept the PDM when coming from the official account of an organization? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, indeed I believe this is the official Nestlé FlickR account. I don't really understand the problem knowing that it is Public Domain Mark on the official company's account. Should I contact Nestlé to have another permission ? Please let me know what the next steps should be, because this is beyond my Commons knowledge ;) thank you very much
- --Jglanclaude (talk) 14:11, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not suggesting there is a problem, I just want to raise it for further discussion to get everyone's opinions. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:57, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
- I understand your point, however the file is now under a procedure of deletion which shows there is an actual "problem". I want to add the image on a page but I want to do it knowing that the file will stay :) Still available to provide any useful information. Thank you --Jglanclaude (talk) 09:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not suggesting there is a problem, I just want to raise it for further discussion to get everyone's opinions. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:57, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: nomination withdrawn. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:51, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
"Source:Amigos" is a sheer lie. Taken from Facebook. E4024 (talk) 01:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. FredWalsh (talk) 05:26, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 07:01, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
copyright ahuR ☘ 19:40, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. copyrighted logo. --Hanooz 19:44, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Unused personal photo. Solomon203 (talk) 05:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Nothing hot nor humid in the image. (We keep only those out-of-scope files which are hot and humid. :) --E4024 (talk) 19:48, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 15:31, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
File description states "the image is from an interview with sportageous.co an online sports magazine" and "the rights to this image is solely reserved by the person her self" - neither of which sounds compatible with CC BY-SA 4.0. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:09, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello Cordless Larry, thanks for putting this in my concern, since I am learning Wikipedia while also give my best contribution to the community. Here I would like to bring this to your front that the edit was asked by the person "Kanzy Defrawy" herself. Please guide me on how do I correct if done any mistake. BizSourabh (talk) 05:25, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Could you confirm who owns the copyright to the photo, BizSourabh? Cordless Larry (talk) 19:03, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Cordless Larry, yah I got it confirmed the photo was taken by Alwaleed Osman who is a friend of Kanzy El Defrawy and not a professional photographer. in short, the copyright of the photograph belongs to Kanzy El Defrawy and will not cause any copyright issue. BizSourabh (talk) 03:18, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- There are several issues here then, BizSourabh. You've uploaded the photo as your own work, but you've now confirmed it isn't. If El Defrawy owns the copyright, then she will need to give permission by following the instructions at Commons:OTRS. She cannot reserve all rights if she wants to release it on the CC licence that you've used. That said, usually ownership of copyright belongs to the photographer. Finally, where the image is used here, it is marked as © 2019 Sportageous, suggesting that they own the copyright. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:08, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Cordless Larry, Can you please guide me what should I do now if in case I have to keep this image - should I edit the info and how it should be, or I delete the image and upload/re-upload and put things in a right order there. I also request you to please help me understand Wikipedia/Wikimedia because there are a lot more I don't really know and wanted to learn. Also that I am going to work on El Defrawy page as it needs to restructure and require to put more info about her. Also, I want to know how can I create new pages/topics like people, movies, companies pages here and how it all work. Thanks again. I would like to discuss more about this if you don't mind. BizSourabh (talk) 06:04, 01 July 2020 (UTC)
- If whoever owns the copyright is happy to give permission for the image to be released under a CC licence, they need to follow the instructions at Commons:OTRS. If that doesn't happen, the image will be deleted and you shouldn't upload it again without providing evidence of permission, BizSourabh. If you have questions about Wikipedia, I suggest asking at en:Wikipedia:Teahouse. However, since you appear to know the subject of the article, you have a conflict of interest and should generally avoid editing it and rather post requests for changes on its talk page. I'll note that the article has a history of unsourced and promotional material being added to it, which I've regularly had to remove. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:58, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by Herbythyme. --Minoraxtalk 15:31, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 09:47, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 15:32, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Probably out of COM:SCOPE. Also might not be own work from the border, but that's speculation. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 15:33, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Sunset Color.png Charlesgreenjr (talk) 14:44, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. User page already blanked. Tag {{SDG7}} if you want it deleted. --Minoraxtalk 15:34, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Sunsetproductions.jpg.png Charlesgreenjr (talk) 15:20, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete No evidence of permission. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:09, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per Stefan2. --Minoraxtalk 15:35, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Sunset Redrawn Charlesgreenjr (talk) 15:24, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete No evidence of permission. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:09, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per Stefan2. --Minoraxtalk 15:35, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ctruongngoc as Speedy (speedy delete) and the most recent rationale was: Copyvio de Milton Glaser (1929-2020 I am challenging this as the logo is below the American threshold of originality. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 15:23, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Graphic consists simply of three characters and a heart shape. Its simple design is below the threshold of originality required for copyright protection. Examples in the gallery at Commons:Threshold_of_originality#United_States_of_America are more complex than this and still ineligible for copyright. Dream out loud (talk) 15:38, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep I agree under the same prequisites. --TheLionHasSeen (talk) 01:42, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- Keep the font is sans serif which is free, and the heart is not an exact duplicate of the original 1970s logo.--BevinKacon (talk)
Kept: per discussion. ƏXPLICIT 11:16, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
own work? I do'nt believe Adelfrank (talk) 01:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 12:29, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
File:Microprodevices a online devicemaking program-Founded- March 1, 2014-Founder- Aedan Allen- 2014-06-28 19-15.jpg
[edit]seems to be not notable. Only (remaining) uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 12:29, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
This is a recent (2008) sculpture still under copyright. Unfortunately, the US does not have freedom of panorama for artworks. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 10:41, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Even if it is a photo? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 98.14.236.204 (talk) 16:44, 28 June 2020 (UTC) Moved from talk page by Pi.1415926535 (talk)
- Yes, photos of copyrighted artworks are considered non-free under US law. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:27, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 12:30, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
Appears to be a corporate promotional photo, I suspect it's copyrighted, though haven't been able to find a source proving it. Uploader states it's from Porsche Motorsport media site and 'libre de droit' (no rights) which is dubious. M.nelson (talk) 12:29, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete. Reverse GIS found this: [11]. No evidence of CC-BY-SA-4.0 or "libre de droit". Spyder_Monkey (talk) 23:40, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- I'm nominating this for speedy deletion, as it's been 3 weeks since my comment with no action. Spyder_Monkey (talk) 14:22, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 19:20, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
own work? copyright Rahul Khan Adelfrank (talk) 02:05, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 11:38, 10 Oktober 2020 UTC: No permission since 2 October 2020 --Krdbot 19:21, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- FBMD. Delete. --E4024 (talk) 18:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 07:30, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
Deriviative work of a poster. De minimis nor FoP do not apply, as the billboard is a main topic of a photo and it's not permanently exhibited. ~Cybularny Speak? 19:54, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- The portrait of PAD comes from the KPRP site. This is not a public domain or any free/open license[12]. RoodyAlien (talk) 11:57, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
- It if is not a public domain it should be deleted Tashi (talk) 13:25, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Masur (talk) 15:36, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
No real proof that the uploader has rights to this image which appears to be a screenshot from http://www.keralacricketassociation.com/p-balachandran-has-been-appointed-as-coach-of-kerala-ranji-trophy, so probable copyright violation / Acabashi (talk) 09:45, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
No response to this one so flagged as a speedy delete for copyright violation. Acabashi (talk) 17:04, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 11:57, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
Facebook image per Metadata, permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 03:59, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. JGHowes talk 18:51, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
image supprimée sur Gallica (pb de droits) https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b9011973w Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 08:28, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- notice bibliographique https://catalogue.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb413318455. --Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 08:32, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep No indication of a copyright problem. The image is still available through Gallica [13] which links to a partner library, Bibliothèque historique de la ville de Paris [14], where the image is described as PD, since it was published anonymously in 1936. Omnia gives it as 'No Copyright - Other Known Legal Restrictions' [15]. — Racconish 💬 08:41, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Auteur inconnu + publication en 1936 = {{PD-anon-70-EU}}. En outre, le site de la BHVP mentionne clairement : "Droits d'accès : Consultable sans restrictions. Droits : domaine public". --Guise (talk) 12:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Quelques précisions. 1) Le site de la BHVP – et tous les sites de la Ville de Paris – sont fort peu précis concernant le statut "domaine public" (contrairement à la BNF qui fait un peu plus attention, guère plus, certes). Les institutions de la Ville de Paris ont mis en ligne un nombre ahurissant de contrefaçons (ce qui fait le bonheur des commonistes qui se dépêchent de mettre en ligne en répétant "domaine public"), j'ai d'ailleurs fait supprimer de nombreux dépôts contrefacteurs. 2) Le site Gallica héberge des documents de plusieurs institutions, mais ne fournit aucune garantie sur le statut "domaine public" accordé par l'institution partenaire. Il est donc abusif comme le fait plus haut Racconish de prendre comme argument "l'image est encore sur Gallica". "Auteur inconnu" signifie "dans l'état actuel des recherches" ; l'image semble signée, mais la définition insuffisante ne permet pas d'identifier l'illustrateur. Dans un publication scientifique honnête, on créditerait correctement "auteur inconnu" et "droits réservés". Sur commons, on se dépêche de mettre en ligne. Deux conceptions différentes du respect de l'auteur (et de ses droits). BàV --Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 08:00, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Dans ces considérations d'ordre général, je ne lis toujours aucune précision relative à cette image, à son auteur et à ce "pb de droits" sur Gallica. --Guise (talk) 17:19, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment I am puzzled by the claim "the image is signed but the insufficient resolution does not allow an identification of the illustrator". The definition of the image (7822 x 10412) would be quite sufficient to see an illustrator's signature if there would be one, but there isn't. Furthermore, the above mentioned assessment at Europeana, "No Copyright - Other Known Legal Restrictions" [16] is coming from BnF, the metadata there state the document is not signed and the Europeana page has a link to the same BnF page used as source for the upload, and an attempt to download it from Europeana returns an "internal server error", which is an indication of a technical problem, not a legal problem. — Racconish 💬 06:48, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
- Comment I dont know if this is relevant or not to this section, anyhow, it seems that both Omnia and/or Europeana source their images mostly via Commons.--DDupard (talk) 11:38, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
- You are wrong. Omnia indexes Europeana and Europeana's data partners are institutions like BnF. — Racconish 💬 07:51, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
- I may be mistaken or wrong as you say, but here on this Omnia page [17], I can read this: " All data on this site is derived from external sources, principally Europeana, but also Wikipedia. As such Niall O'Leary Services accepts no liability in respect of the accuracy of data on this website. All data on this site is presented as is and visitors use it at their own risk.".--DDupard (talk) 10:25, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
- Kindly check on the referenced Omnia page the sections "Repository page", "Web page", and "Rights". — Racconish 💬 12:23, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for providing those links, which all lead back to this one [18] 403: Forbidden.--DDupard (talk) 12:46, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
- Again this is merely a HTTP 403, technical and not legal. But you are right, we are going in circles and I will leave it there. — Racconish 💬 13:39, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
- Quote : "HTTP 403 is a HTTP status code meaning access to the requested resource is forbidden for some reason." (unspecified reason => reasonable doubt or simple doubt).--DDupard (talk) 15:25, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for providing those links, which all lead back to this one [18] 403: Forbidden.--DDupard (talk) 12:46, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
- Kindly check on the referenced Omnia page the sections "Repository page", "Web page", and "Rights". — Racconish 💬 12:23, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
- Quelques précisions. 1) Le site de la BHVP – et tous les sites de la Ville de Paris – sont fort peu précis concernant le statut "domaine public" (contrairement à la BNF qui fait un peu plus attention, guère plus, certes). Les institutions de la Ville de Paris ont mis en ligne un nombre ahurissant de contrefaçons (ce qui fait le bonheur des commonistes qui se dépêchent de mettre en ligne en répétant "domaine public"), j'ai d'ailleurs fait supprimer de nombreux dépôts contrefacteurs. 2) Le site Gallica héberge des documents de plusieurs institutions, mais ne fournit aucune garantie sur le statut "domaine public" accordé par l'institution partenaire. Il est donc abusif comme le fait plus haut Racconish de prendre comme argument "l'image est encore sur Gallica". "Auteur inconnu" signifie "dans l'état actuel des recherches" ; l'image semble signée, mais la définition insuffisante ne permet pas d'identifier l'illustrateur. Dans un publication scientifique honnête, on créditerait correctement "auteur inconnu" et "droits réservés". Sur commons, on se dépêche de mettre en ligne. Deux conceptions différentes du respect de l'auteur (et de ses droits). BàV --Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 08:00, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Racist image containing a list of jewish family names (among others), this image could be detrimental or potentially dangerous for descendants if used in a malicious context/manner.--DDupard (talk) 15:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Triplement absurde. 1°) Vous continuez à extrapoler en évoquant des cas théoriques où des antisémites contemporains brandiraient cette liste quasi-centenaire à l'encontre de descendants ; eh bien, on peut extrapoler de même en rétorquant que ces antisémites tomberaient dès lors sous le coup de loi. 2°) Pour mémoire, il existe sur Commons des catégories entières avec d'innombrables images racistes et antisémites (Antisemitism in France under the Third Republic, Antisemitism by country, Antisemitism... 3°) Sur Wikipédia, de telles images servent à illustrer des textes solidement sourcés par des études historiques, dont certaines (Delporte, Les crayons de la propagande, CNRS Éditions, 1993 ; Gervereau et Peschanski, La propagande sous Vichy, 1940-1944, BDIC, 1990...) reproduisent les illustrations en question dans le cadre de leurs analyses (à l'instar de nombre de manuels scolaires). --Guise (talk) 13:45, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- The difference here is the nominal roll. In the event that after the holocaust, the families bearing these names are not all extinct; Is it not clear to see that by republishing this very list of names - essentially personal attributes - herein intended to stigmatise, amounts to a perpetration or a second round of racist pornography?--DDupard (talk) 08:03, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Les éventuels descendants ne sont pas impactés par les bassesses antisémites qui visèrent leurs ancêtres ; du reste, cette liste ne déshonore que ceux qui l'ont établie. Bref, aucune raison de supprimer un fichier qui illustre parfaitement le climat antisémite de cette époque, climat dont François Coty est un représentant notoire. --Guise (talk) 11:58, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Could be, could be not ; Is it sufficient putting the shame on the authors’ side? The image does not explicitly do so (on the contrary). Who reads wikipedia? Everyone and their brother, educated or not educated. As we know, the world is not perfect yet, and we hear, some Jewish schools or cemeteries still being the target of lunatics or murderers, the stigma is not merely a thing of a - very long - past. It’s still alive. Why, by wishful thinking, be the reckless accomplice of a long tradition of hatred for the jews, in this particular instance, with the broadcasting of a malicious selected list of patronymic surnames of their people? --DDupard (talk) 19:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Toutes ces circonvolutions vous font oublier qu'on se sert de l'image pour illustrer un article Wikipédia qui contextualise - sources secondaires à l'appui - cet antisémitisme en mettant en relief les pratiques d'époque de ces propagateurs de haine, en l'occurrence François Coty et ses folliculaires. --Guise (talk) 20:29, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oh, I did not realise that wikipedia commons was an instrument at the service of one specific 'cause celèbre'. I was speaking in general ethics terms. --DDupard (talk) 20:44, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Illustrer un article Wikipedia "sourcé" par des études historiques qui mentionnent le climat antisémite de l'époque, cela n'est en rien de l'"instrumentalisation". Tenter de minimiser cet aspect de François Coty en citant une source primaire, à savoir un plaidoyer d'un de ses employés juifs [19], ça, par contre... --Guise (talk) 22:04, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oh, I did not realise that wikipedia commons was an instrument at the service of one specific 'cause celèbre'. I was speaking in general ethics terms. --DDupard (talk) 20:44, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Toutes ces circonvolutions vous font oublier qu'on se sert de l'image pour illustrer un article Wikipédia qui contextualise - sources secondaires à l'appui - cet antisémitisme en mettant en relief les pratiques d'époque de ces propagateurs de haine, en l'occurrence François Coty et ses folliculaires. --Guise (talk) 20:29, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Could be, could be not ; Is it sufficient putting the shame on the authors’ side? The image does not explicitly do so (on the contrary). Who reads wikipedia? Everyone and their brother, educated or not educated. As we know, the world is not perfect yet, and we hear, some Jewish schools or cemeteries still being the target of lunatics or murderers, the stigma is not merely a thing of a - very long - past. It’s still alive. Why, by wishful thinking, be the reckless accomplice of a long tradition of hatred for the jews, in this particular instance, with the broadcasting of a malicious selected list of patronymic surnames of their people? --DDupard (talk) 19:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Les éventuels descendants ne sont pas impactés par les bassesses antisémites qui visèrent leurs ancêtres ; du reste, cette liste ne déshonore que ceux qui l'ont établie. Bref, aucune raison de supprimer un fichier qui illustre parfaitement le climat antisémite de cette époque, climat dont François Coty est un représentant notoire. --Guise (talk) 11:58, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- The difference here is the nominal roll. In the event that after the holocaust, the families bearing these names are not all extinct; Is it not clear to see that by republishing this very list of names - essentially personal attributes - herein intended to stigmatise, amounts to a perpetration or a second round of racist pornography?--DDupard (talk) 08:03, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Triplement absurde. 1°) Vous continuez à extrapoler en évoquant des cas théoriques où des antisémites contemporains brandiraient cette liste quasi-centenaire à l'encontre de descendants ; eh bien, on peut extrapoler de même en rétorquant que ces antisémites tomberaient dès lors sous le coup de loi. 2°) Pour mémoire, il existe sur Commons des catégories entières avec d'innombrables images racistes et antisémites (Antisemitism in France under the Third Republic, Antisemitism by country, Antisemitism... 3°) Sur Wikipédia, de telles images servent à illustrer des textes solidement sourcés par des études historiques, dont certaines (Delporte, Les crayons de la propagande, CNRS Éditions, 1993 ; Gervereau et Peschanski, La propagande sous Vichy, 1940-1944, BDIC, 1990...) reproduisent les illustrations en question dans le cadre de leurs analyses (à l'instar de nombre de manuels scolaires). --Guise (talk) 13:45, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. Author is unknown and it was published 84 years ago (more than 70 years), so it is in the public domain ({{PD-anon-70-EU}}). Regarding the argument that this could be racist (argument from DDupard, above), Commons is not censored and this file reaches the scope of the projet. NoFWDaddress (d) 20:24, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
- If BnF denies/forbids access to a document, (as for example news agencies do, when they avoid broadcasting gruesome images), censorship or not, I don't quite see how nor why Wikimedia Commons would negate that and publish them anyhow.--DDupard (talk) 16:11, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
- Le site de la Bibliothèque Historique de la Ville de Paris affirme qu'il n'y a pas de problème de droits d'auteur [20]. De surcroît, personne ne connait les raisons de la restriction sur Gallica, donc supposer que cela relève de tel ou tel problème n'est qu'extrapolation de votre part. --Guise (talk) 09:14, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- The 403 error code is likely due to the fact access is not granted any more (and should probably not have been granted in the first place) to the page where an internal copy of the image is stored by BNF, while its server is expecting requests only for the page pointing to the external source, BHVP's web site. — Racconish 💬 07:32, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
- If BnF denies/forbids access to a document, (as for example news agencies do, when they avoid broadcasting gruesome images), censorship or not, I don't quite see how nor why Wikimedia Commons would negate that and publish them anyhow.--DDupard (talk) 16:11, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
In this document on Persée.fr, [21], the very image discussed, page 20 of doc. cited has been ‘masked’ : a note in French indicates Cet article contient des illustrations pour lesquelles nous n'avons pas reçu d'autorisation de diffusion (en savoir plus): Avant de procéder à toute mise en ligne, les responsables des revues sollicent les auteurs d’articles et d’illustrations pour obtenir leurs autorisations. Dans cet article, la personne disposant des droits sur les illustrations a dû refuser la diffusion libre et gratuite de son travail. Nous avons apposé des masques permettant de dissimuler l’illustration (et donc de satisfaire la demande de l’ayant droit) et de laisser un accès libre au texte de l’article.--DDupard (talk) 10:42, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blatant case of {{PD-anon-70-EU}}. --Cavarrone (talk) 13:46, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Per discussion - PD-anon-70-EU applies. --Gbawden (talk) 06:56, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
COM:DW of copyrighted works. No FoP in US for artworks. Yuraily Lic (talk) 04:02, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- This photo was taken by myself, and the model of Alxasaurus was taken at a temporary dinosaur exhibition in the Discovery Science Center in Santa Ana, so isn't a copyrighted permanent exhibition. Therefore, it would be a shame to delete this photo.Extrapolaris (talk) 14:49, 29 June 2020 (UTC)Vahe Demirjian
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:47, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
COM:DW of copyrighted works. No FoP in US for artworks. Yuraily Lic (talk) 04:04, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:56, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
File claimed as own work. However, since the Amityville hauntings occurred in mid-1970s, and the famous photos circulating that purportedly show the "ghost" on the stairwell were published by the press and various non-free sources, it is likely that there's no free image of such a "ghost on the stairs" of Amityville house. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:24, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 06:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Uploads by Gunbirddriver2
[edit]- File:Hans-Joachim-Jabs.jpg
- File:Greb_080111_01.2.jpg
- File:Me_109s.jpg
- File:10.5_cm_leFH18_Lorraine.jpg compare https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C33683
- File:Hans_von_Luck.5.jpg
- File:Scharnhorst_and_Gneisenau.jpg
- File:Operationswagen.jpg
- File:10.5_cm_leFH_18(Sf)_auf_Geschützwagen_39H_(f).2.jpg
- File:Beobachtungspanzer_auf_Lorraine_Schlepper(f).2.jpg
- File:8_cm_Reihenwerfer_S303_(f).1.jpg
- File:10,5cm_leFH_18_Geschützwagen_FCM_36(f).jpg
- File:7.5_cm_Pak_40_(Sf)_Geschützwagen_auf_FCM_36(f).jpg
- File:Zugkraftwagen_Unic_P107.2.jpg
- File:Zugkraftwagen_P107.1.jpg
- File:Panzerkampfwagen_38(f)_mit_28-32cm_Wurfrahmen.jpg
- File:8_cm_Schwerer_Reihenwerfer_S303_(f).jpg
- File:2_cm_Flak_36_leSPW_U304(f).jpg
- File:SOMUA_MCL_in_Backocommando_Becker.jpg
- File:8_cm_Vielfachwerfer_S303(f).jpg
- File:MSPW_S307(f).jpg
- File:10.5cm_leFH_16_Geschützwagen_auf_Vickers_Mk_VI.7.jpg
- File:10.5cm_leFH_16_Geschützwagen_auf_Vickers_Mk_VI_Battery.5.jpg
- File:10.5cm_leFH_16_Geschützwagen_auf_Vickers_Mk_VI_Battery.4.jpg
- File:10.5cm_leFH_16_Geschützwagen_auf_Vickers_Mk_VI_Battery.6.jpg
- File:10.5cm_leFH_16_Vickers_Mk_VI_prototype.1.jpg
- File:10.5cm_leFH_16_Geschützwagen_auf_Vickers_Mk_VI.3.jpg
- File:10.5cm_leFH_16_Geschützwagen_auf_Vickers_Mk_VI.3.jpg
- File:10,5cm_leFH_16_auf_Vickers_MkVI(e).jpg
- File:Unic_p107_spw.jpg
- File:Unic_P107_BU_8.jpg
- File:MSPW_S307(f)_7.5_cm_PaK_40.jpg
- File:15_cm_sFH13_auf_Geschützwagen_Lorraine_Schlepper_(f).jpg
- File:Marder_I.jpg
- File:Panzerjäger_Geschützwagen_4,7_cm_Pak_(t).jpg
- File:Beobachtungspanzer_Lorraine.jpg
- File:Somua_MCG_7.5cm_Pak_40.jpg
- File:Geschutzwagen_105mm-leFH-16.jpg
- File:SOMUA_MCG_Fahrzeuge_7.5-cm-Pak_40_July_1944.2.jpg
- File:Alfred_Becker.2.jpg
- File:Alfred_Becker.jpg
- File:Geschutzwagen_39H(f)_10.5_cm.2.jpg
- File:Grebbe.jpg
- File:DAK_in_Tobruk.jpg
- File:150cm_gun_at_1st_Battle_of_El_Alamein.jpg
Above images are licensed with {{PD-BW}}. This is not possible because the Zentrale Dienstvorschrift is a system of rules for the German "Bundeswehr", who was founded in 1955. Therefore it is not possible that the "Zentrale Dienstvorschrift" contains images from the 2nd World War.
The sources for all above images are links from various websites, no concrete photographer are mentioned. I have contacted the "Bundesarchiv" (Federal Archive of Germany). They donated in the past ~90,000 images but they to not know anything about these images.
To be fair it is possible that some the images are already in the public domain due to various reasons. But these have to be mentioned for every image that would be kept. Raymond 08:42, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- +1 "already in the public domain due to various reasons" pls compare au.gov example selection concerning tanks = PD-Free. I see a lack of many adequate Releases for military pictures comparable given with "PD-because|Released by Australian War Memorial to Public Domain" in File:MasaoBaba Labuan01.jpg Greets --Ｔｏｍ (talk) 14:40, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
- Some I deleted. I will continue later with that. But pls check File:Me_109s.jpg. It has also a Bundesarchiv licesen.--Sanandros (talk) 05:50, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Sanandros: Thank you for your review. The license in File:Me_109s.jpg is wrong. This image was neither uploadeded (User:BArchBot) nor authorized (no OTRS) by the Bundesarchiv.Raymond 07:10, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
- Some I deleted. I will continue later with that. But pls check File:Me_109s.jpg. It has also a Bundesarchiv licesen.--Sanandros (talk) 05:50, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Sanandros (talk) 05:29, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Per COM:PACKAGE A1Cafel (talk) 04:43, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:26, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Low res, higher res found at [22][23] --Baycrest (Talk) 16:47, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Baycrest: Speedy delete Found on this archive page for blatant copyright violation, and in fact, making good use of Google search and TinEye greatly helps with deletion procedures.廣九直通車 (talk) 03:31, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
- I agree with you. --Baycrest (Talk) 16:06, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 08:32, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Lacks verifiable source (reverse image search was unsuccessful). The license claims author death, but information states it's unknown who the photographer was. Also lacking PD-US rationale and original publication. Buidhe (talk) 23:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- use:
|
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published in the United States between 1929 and 1977, inclusive, without a copyright notice. For further explanation, see Commons:Hirtle chart as well as a detailed definition of "publication" for public art.
|
 |
- When was it published? What publication/date? Was the US publication the first one? Buidhe (talk) 09:57, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- According to the Green House in Vilnius, this photo was part of a package of photos sent to the US for the trials of Nazis after the war; --FLLL (talk) 07:32, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- Deleted, no information about photographer or publishing history. Thuresson (talk) 21:53, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Refferal as US has no FoP for artwork, This is a 'sculptural' artwork of recent origin. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination.
Addition,
--Yuraily Lic (talk) 15:08, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 11:18, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Sculptural artwork of recent origin. No FoP in US. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 11:19, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
This is a very high resolution version of a copyrighted, non-free logo Deliriousgreen (talk) 13:13, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 11:09, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by LeonnyFragoso (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused, no foreseeable use. Should be replaced by and if useful.
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_Trivandrum_India.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.webp){kind=link}
![173 File:Mary Gaylord Mclean and The Five gaited Mare, "According to Lynn" (3930800948).jpg](#File:Mary_Gaylord_Mclean_and_The_Five_gaited_Mare,_"According_to_Lynn"_(3930800948).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(3).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.gif){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
(공개되지_않음).png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(IA_americancinemato31unse)_(page_13_crop).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[1]](http://img.mp.itc.cn/upload/20170413/c3083526684d4ecc99e008cb946010aa_th.jpeg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(3).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(3).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(2).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(2).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}
_3.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Pesta_Nunuk_Ragang_2010_ditag_di.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[6]](https://globalstudies-masters.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/mexican-student-corona.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[10]](http://5b0988e595225.cdn.sohucs.com/images/20190704/387225101a504118a8f0fec8a2f0ce90.jpeg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trivandrum_India.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trivandrum_India.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_Trivandrum_India.jpg){kind=link}
_Trivandrum_India.jpg){kind=link}
_trivandrum_India.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_trivandrum_India.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.webp&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.webp&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.webp){kind=link}
.webp){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_auf_Gesch%C3%BCtzwagen_39H_(f).2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.1.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Gesch%C3%BCtzwagen_auf_FCM_36(f).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_mit_28-32cm_Wurfrahmen.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}
_7.5_cm_PaK_40.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_10.5_cm.2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[23]](http://topic.cena.com.cn/img/attachement/jpg/site2/20150417/001921307672169a9b5101.jpg){kind=link}
_(3).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(3).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_(3).jpg){kind=link}
_(3).jpg){kind=link}
_(3).jpg){kind=link}
_(3).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Stefan2 (talk) 19:34, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
congratulations, you know how to write equations in HTML. I am a high school teacher who makes the formula in word and I need to share it with my students on a wiki and all I know is how to use the image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeonnyFragoso (talk • contribs) 22:59, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- You can ask others to help you if you don't know TeX. also, these exact files are now obsolete, as their replacement has been given by the nominator. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:14, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 11:10, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Mexico City Metro 2D pictograms
[edit]- File:Aculco.png
- File:Aragon-picto.JPG
- File:Balbuena icono.svg
- File:Estacion Mixcoac.JPG
- File:LaVilla-Basílica.jpg
- File:Linea 12.jpg
- File:Logo Gomez Farias (estación).svg
- File:Logo Pantitlán (estación).svg
- File:METRO 18 DE MARZO.JPG
- File:Metro Balderas.svg
- File:METRO BOULEVARD PUERTO AEREO.JPG
- File:METRO COLEGIO MILITAR.JPG
- File:METRO CUATRO CAMINOS.JPG
- File:Metro El Rosario.svg
- File:METRO GENERAL ANAYA.JPG
- File:METRO HIDALGO.JPG
- File:Metro Hidalgo.svg
- File:Metro Insurgentes.svg
- File:METRO JUAREZ.JPG
- File:METRO LA RAZA.JPG
- File:Metro Merced.svg
- File:METRO MOCTEZUMA.JPG
- File:Metro Morelos.svg
- File:METRO NINOS HEROES.JPG
- File:Metro Observatorio.svg
- File:METRO POPOTLA.JPG
- File:METRO SAN ANTONIO ABAD.JPG
- File:METRO SAN COSME.JPG
- File:Metro Sevilla.svg
- File:Metro Tezozómoc.svg
- File:METRO ZARAGOZA.JPG
- File:METRO ZOCALO.JPG
- File:Metro-aragon-icon.png
- File:Metro-generalanaya.png
- File:MetroDFBalderas.jpg
- File:METRODFCentroMedico.jpg
- File:METRODFCoyoacan.jpg
- File:METRODFEtiopia.jpg
- File:METRODFObservatorio.jpg
- File:METRODFViveros.jpg
- File:METROTacubaya.jpg
- File:NezahualcoyotlMetro.jpg
- File:Panteones icono.svg
- File:Saltodelagua.png
- File:Logo Estación Zaragoza.svg
- File:METRODFMAQuevedo.jpg
- File:METRODFUniversidad.jpg
- File:METRO PANTITLAN.JPG
- File:Copilco.png
- File:METRO NORMAL.JPG
- File:Metro-normal-icon.jpg
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Although Mexico City Metro's website uses a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International for their website[24], it also includes a warning saying this excludes any registered material. Then, there is this warning: "La iconografía y tipografía se encuentran registradas ante el Instituto Nacional de Derechos de Autor, se prohíbe su uso, reproducción, modificación o comercialización sin permiso escrito por el STC." (Iconography and typography are registered through Mexican Institute of Industrial Property. Its use, reproduction, modification, and commercialization are forbidden without written permission). I assume Lance Wyman retains the original copyrights. Template:PD-Coa-Mexico might not necessarily apply because, if they were, they wouldn't be registered in the first place. Tbhotch™ 19:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 11:14, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
1945 photograph claimed as own work. Unclear copyright status. Buidhe (talk) 02:21, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Deleted, per nomination. Thuresson (talk) 20:39, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by JuTa as no license. Uploader added PD-old later. But for a 1945 work its hard to assume that the author died before 1950. JuTa 04:26, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
its hard but no impossible. Santy1289
- Delete per nom. Need more info on author to keep it. Abzeronow (talk) 18:31, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, most people who took photos in 1945 still lived in 1951. Thuresson (talk) 20:42, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
A user who claims to be the subject herself (which I see no reason to question) has edited (diff) the byline on sv.wikipedia giving credit to ”Jan Danielsson/SVT" (SVT is Swedish public service television). But SVT press pictures are rarely free from copyright, and the uploader is probably not the photographer himself. NH 21:34, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete this image was mentioned in this OTRS Ticket:2020062710005521. It has also been removed from the article about the subject. This alternate image File:Ann Linn Guillou.jpeg has been verified and is in the article. Ww2censor (talk) 12:11, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
- Deleted, per discussion. Thuresson (talk) 20:32, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The image was named after the wrong person. See User talk:McSmit and en:User talk:Anaceofdiamonds. Two separate people have reported the misnamed file. Rob (talk) 23:00, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Can't we just rename the file to whomever it actually is? - FakirNL (talk) 06:26, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Or it is just the redirect that needed to be deleted? In that case go ahead! - FakirNL (talk) 06:47, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, it's just the redirect. I probably used the wrong deletion process. --Rob (talk) 06:21, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
- Or it is just the redirect that needed to be deleted? In that case go ahead! - FakirNL (talk) 06:47, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Not done, moved to File:Jay Morrison (2008-11-16).jpg. Thuresson (talk) 20:35, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.gif&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.gif&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unnecessary unknown personal creative logo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exj (talk • contribs) 2020-06-23T23:41:38 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 05:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
.gif){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unnecessary unknown personal creative logo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exj (talk • contribs) 2020-06-23T23:57:48 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 05:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unnecessary unknown personal creative logo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exj (talk • contribs) 2020-06-23T23:58:03 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 05:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
(%EA%B3%B5%EA%B0%9C%EB%90%98%EC%A7%80_%EC%95%8A%EC%9D%8C).png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
(%EA%B3%B5%EA%B0%9C%EB%90%98%EC%A7%80_%EC%95%8A%EC%9D%8C).png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unnecessary unknown personal creative logo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exj (talk • contribs) 2020-06-23T23:58:41 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 05:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
(공개되지_않음).png){kind=link}
Files uploaded by PARTHASARATHI.N (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused text documents of unclear notability. Out of project scope.
- File:சிவகாமி னடனம்!.pptx.pdf
- File:சிவகாமி னடனம்அன்பு.jpg
- File:சிவகாமினடனம் அன்பு.jpg
- File:சிவகாமி னடனம் --- அன்பு.jpg
- File:சிவகாமி னடனம் - அன்பு.jpg
- File:சிவகாமி னடனம் அன்பு.jpg
- File:CONCLUSION 3.jpg
- File:Conclusion 4.jpg
- File:CONCLUSION 1.jpg
- File:REFERENCES.jpg
- File:CONCLUSION 2.jpg
Stefan2 (talk) 14:04, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:26, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by PARTHASARATHI.N (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused diagrams of unclear notability. Out of project scope.
- File:SIMULATION OF CANCER DIFFERENTIATION THERAPHY FOR COVID-19 REMOVAL.gif
- File:Covid-19 transformation.gif
Stefan2 (talk) 14:05, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:27, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by PARTHASARATHI.N (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.
- File:சிவகாமி னடனம்அன்பு.jpg
- File:சிவகாமினடனம் அன்பு.jpg
- File:சிவகாமி னடனம் --- அன்பு.jpg
- File:சிவகாமி னடனம் - அன்பு.jpg
- File:சிவகாமி னடனம் அன்பு.jpg
- File:CONCLUSION 3.jpg
- File:Conclusion 4.jpg
- File:CONCLUSION 2.jpg
- File:REFERENCES.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:05, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- User:EugeneZelenko, note that the files (or at least most of them) already were listed in the first section on this page. The uploader removed the {{Delete}} template from a number of files, so this might not have been obvious to you. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:26, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didn't dig into files history. Anyway, additional notice to user would be educational. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:30, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:28, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by PARTHASARATHI.N (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused text document of unclear notability. Out of project scope. The JPG appears to be identical to the first page of the PDF.
Stefan2 (talk) 08:41, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 05:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
ss/copyright ahuR ☘ 18:44, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 05:21, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Obvious copyright violation Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 20:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 05:21, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Unused personal image. Solomon203 (talk) 08:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; unused screenshot of a Wikipedia user page. --Gestumblindi (talk) 17:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
He vendido esta fotografía MarixaGil (talk) 22:03, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Author is Vidar Hoksaas per exif. Permission needed. --Minoraxtalk 13:31, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
He vendido esta fotografía MarixaGil (talk) 22:04, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Author is Vidar Hoksaas per exif. Permission needed. --Minoraxtalk 13:31, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
He vendido esta fotografía MarixaGil (talk) 22:05, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Author is Vidar Hoksaas per exif. Permission needed. --Minoraxtalk 13:31, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
He vendido esta fotografía MarixaGil (talk) 22:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Author is Vidar Hoksaas per exif. Permission needed. --Minoraxtalk 13:31, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
He vendido esta fotografía MarixaGil (talk) 22:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Author is Vidar Hoksaas per exif. Permission needed. --Minoraxtalk 13:31, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
He vendido esta fotografía MarixaGil (talk) 22:07, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Author is Vidar Hoksaas per exif. Permission needed. --Minoraxtalk 13:31, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
File described as authored by the Sangguniang Bayan (town council) of Enrile. But while finding through https://www.google.com/search?tbs=simg:CAQSsQIJYMDxXq6tE-IapQILEKjU2AQaBAhCCEMMCxCwjKcIGmIKYAgDEijDG8EXwRudDbwbjhyrGMAbrhixHss-xz7MPto_13D_1IOdA-vjnGPog2GjBaSxv7q_19URGIDyb5BOo8dCBar01cvpyteDkkQgLNgB8r2hnY2aZ7qOqu9LU69q0MgBAwLEI6u_1ggaCgoICAESBI9TKw8MCxCd7cEJGpABChsKCG9mZmljaWFs2qWI9gMLCgkvbS8wMzV5MzMKHAoKbWFuYWdlbWVudNqliPYDCgoIL20vMDRfdHYKGgoHc2VtaW5hctqliPYDCwoJL20vMDMyMzNsChkKBmRlYmF0ZdqliPYDCwoJL20vMDF4cTN3ChwKCmdvdmVybm1lbnTapYj2AwoKCC9tLzAzNm56DA&sxsrf=ALeKk01q57j3yMlG32cDXv6geg3PnzlrSg:1593366500583&q=official&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi_j47iiKXqAhUBM94KHeWDBLAQ2A4oAXoECAgQBA&biw=412&bih=718 I found another duplicate picture, which when clicking the link below pulls me straight to the Facebook page https://mbasic.facebook.com/sketchit.printhub/ . I became suspicious of the existence of such a duplicate file. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:03, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:05, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
The watermark says the Flickr user is not being honest. 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:28, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Comment What do you mean with that?, Ther are other images from that flicrk account that was owned supposedly by Walmart, and that website is no longer avaliable --RevengerTime (talk) 00:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete and authorship was proven in previous dr´s. Tm (talk) 01:31, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:51, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
I agree with the previous nominator here. The watermark is suspicious. The resolution is lower than 1 MP, and the EXIF data is missing. I doubt this is the own work by the Flickr user. COM:PRP. pandakekok9 02:07, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete The Flickr user claims to be a "shopper engagement agency", with no evidence of being a copyright holder. FredWalsh (talk) 06:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 01:41, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Cropped version of a wider picture visible on other non free websites (like this one). No proof it's free. Please send OTRS authorization (see in French: Aide:Republication/Image). Titlutin (talk) 00:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 01:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Wikimedia Commons no Fair Use — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.80.238.152 (talk • contribs) 2020-06-22T22:04:57 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 01:42, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
I have uploaded a better photo for this fungus, and already uploaded the new version. I would like to delete this file. Khalil Kariman (talk) 01:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 01:40, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
own work? I do'nt believe Adelfrank (talk) 02:11, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Definetly not own work. I can find images before the Commons upload in 2017. See for example a 2013 rtve article, which is copyrighted. This is from Isabel, a 2012 TV series. Therefore, this is too recent to pass PD-Spain. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:49, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Small file w/o camera EXIF by a one-time-only uploader, of course it was not an "own work". Not used either. E4024 (talk) 01:08, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 01:42, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Similar to the case in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dulce Maria en Acceso Total - 4946710578.jpg (second nom :). E4024 (talk) 02:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 01:41, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Not PD-US according to URAA. I am not sure that it qualifies under $134 either since the publication states its contributors on the title page. Feld is a real surname so it is likely not considered anonymous work in other EU countries. Buidhe (talk) 03:00, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 01:41, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Erroneously uploaded incorrect file, user wants to delete this version. MorenoJV (talk) 03:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 01:43, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
These photos are unlikely to be the work of the uploader. They have been taken from Facebook without permission or attribution. See the EXIF for the FB tags.
- File:Santa Ana y Vista al Lago Titicaca.jpg
- File:Virgencita del Pueblo.jpg
- File:Vista al Lago y las Islas Flotantes.jpg
FredWalsh (talk) 05:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 01:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Cropped from a larger image at external website. Unlikely to be the uploader work. FredWalsh (talk) 05:51, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 01:47, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
out of scope. - a little better is File:Renne de Vielmond remasterizada.jpg Adelfrank (talk) 11:21, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- 12 KB dubious ow; delete. --E4024 (talk) 17:34, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
unlikely to be own work Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:50, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Copyright violation: It is claimed to have been "created by NASA", and thus to be in the public domain. This does not seem to be the case. The source, [25], has been published via NASA's Astrophysics Data System ADSABS, but so has a large fraction of all papers that were ever published. The terms of use say, Full-text articles and abstracts of papers available from the ADS databases are copyrighted by the respective publishers and are subject to all applicable copyright protection under the laws of the United States and other countries. The reproduction of full-text articles or abstracts requires express written permission from the publisher. The source article itself has an explicit copyright notice for the European Southern Observatory, and a note to contact one of the authors about reprint permission. Renerpho (talk) 16:31, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Looks to have been republished by NASA, but as an explicitly copyrighted document, so the given license tag does not apply. Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:42, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:51, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
rendu obsolète par version .svg normalisée de bien meilleure qualité et moins lourde. Jean-Mahmoud (talk) 00:47, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. [fr:] Ce n'est pas une raison suffisante pour une suppression. Premièrement, ce fichier est actuellement utilisé sur des sites Wikimedia. La demande de suppression est donc déjà irrecevable sur ce point. Mais cela peut changer et ce n'est pas la raison principale à long terme. Deuxièmement, ce qui est plus important, c'est que cette image est ici depuis plus de quatorze ans et qu'elle a presque certainement été réutilisée à l'extérieur de Wikimedia. Commons en constitue la source et l'archive documentaire qui permet aux intéressés de vérifier cette source, son état d'origine et son statut de droit d'auteur. Troisièmement, le fichier svg n'est pas une vectorisation de cette interprétation. Ce n'est pas la même interprétation du blason. Il s'agit d'une interprétation différente. [En:] Not a sufficient reason for deletion. Firstly, it's in use. The deletion request is already irreceivable on this point. But this could change and it's not the main reason on the long term. Secondly, and more importantly, this image is here since more than 14 years and has almost certainly been reused outside Wikimedia. Commons constitutes its source and the archive that allows the public to verify that source, its original state and its copyright status. Thirdly, the svg file is not a vectorisation of this image. It is not the same interpretation of the blason. It is a different interpretation. -- Asclepias (talk) 13:06, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep tant que le fichier est utilisé, il n'est même pas envisageable de le supprimer. Kathisma (talk) 23:14, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: in use. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:33, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
A random photo of a random driver in Korean language is used, and it's a screen capture possibly. The info about the photo is lacking at best, and the photo's original author is unidentified. Even if the photo were taken by a national or local traffic agency, the photo would still be potentially copyrighted as it's not taken in California or Florida. The whole image should not be used. George Ho (talk) 04:39, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by User:GeorgeLacatus
[edit]- File:Gheorghe Sarau, 1974.gif
- File:Gheorghe Sarau 2.gif
- File:Gheorghe Sarau, 1993, sudul Frantei.gif
- File:Gheorghe Sarau, lansare carte.gif
- File:Gheorghe Sarau, 15.04.2020.gif
- File:Gheorghe Sarau si elevii la Liceului Pedagogic Bucuresti, 1992.gif
It is hard to believe that all these files are uploader’s own work. One of them is a copyrighted book cover design (File:Gheorghe Sarau, 15.04.2020.gif). --Pafsanias (talk) 07:05, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:32, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
In removing my "no permission tag" @Nightscream: states in the edit summary "The copyright owner is whoever is arranged to be the owner when the photograph is taken. Ms. Steinhauser informed me that she owns the photo, not the photographer. " This is of course true. However equally true is that the uploader's claim of "own work" is not true given the photogrpaher's name being in the caption. Equally we cannot host images based on "someone told me it was ok". This image needs COM:OTRS for us to host it. Herby talk thyme 07:29, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete No copyright tag.
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:31, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
{{Duplicate|Ruins of old Kolka lighthouse - panoramio.jpg|later upload}} Dāvis Kļaviņš (talk) 09:56, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: already redirected. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:28, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Because it's a duplicated file Voxfax (talk) 13:25, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Because it's a my duplicated file Voxfax (talk) 13:27, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no duplicate file found. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:38, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Photographer's name must be erased. If you crop directly then the animal's all four feet will not be seen, which is already the case of one. Let us hope the uploader uploads the original photo without the name within a week; if not delete it, unless someone spares time to save the image some other way, of course. E4024 (talk) 13:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Please also see: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mandai dog 29 inch tall boar hunter mass look.png. --E4024 (talk) 15:22, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- If the uploader knows how to write his name on the file they also must know how to cut it off. As no crop has been made in such a long time, IMO this file must be deleted soon. --E4024 (talk) 16:52, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, unusable. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:39, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Can someone delete this redirect. I need to rename a file to this redirect name. The overpass actually is in Lamar County, not Butts County. Mjrmtg (talk) 14:00, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:40, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- Derivative work. I do think that most of the advert is PD-simple, but the logo of the flag becoming a foreign passport is probably creative enough. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 14:38, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Возражаю против удаления (не знаю английского языка, потому пишу по-русски). В отношении этого файла по щиту авторское право не действует (на исходное изображение), так как щит представляет собой копию официального документа (агитационной продукции) ЦИК России. То есть государственного органа. А мое фото свободного документа является также свободным. IvanA (talk) 19:01, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- (translation by User:Gone Postal) I object against deletion (I do not know English, therefore I write in Russian). Copyright is not aplicale to this image (for the original image), since the bilboard consists of a copy of an official document (agitational flier) of CEC of Russia. In other words, governmental body. And my photo of a free document is also free. (signed by IvanA) ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 04:05, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- I think the picture of flaf of Russia and red passport is de minimis. This small details is on every billboard in Russia (I made a photo in Moscow, and this details exist too and looks like this photo). So I think the photo should be Keep — whether the detail will be blurred, deleted from photo or not. --Brateevsky {talk} 17:26, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- I would like to stress that the fact that something is widespread does not make something de minimis. And there is no such thing as dilution of copyright (there is dilution of trademark, but that is a different concept). I still think that it is not DM, but if it can be argued in court, then I have no problem with that image. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 13:23, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: logo is certainly DM. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:42, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:44, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:42, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Copyrighted sign. FunkMonk (talk) 14:51, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:43, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: although transmission code in metadata, it also says Author Edu Guimarães (matching uploader). LIkely self-published on other sites (but no longer found now...). --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:50, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:Northeastern University (China)
[edit]The calligraphy "東北大學" in this logo is still copyrighed. Because it was created in 1992. official page COM:TOO China
_logo.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Larryasou (talk) 18:47, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:55, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
A truly awful image. There are much better images in the locomotive in its category. Michael Childs (talk) 21:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- I uploaded this image here as part of the great push to move images to Commons in 2005. If it's unused and not useful, I have no problem with deletion.– Quadell (talk) 22:19, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:55, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
the pd tag is false. this symbol is the work of art by Stsnislaw Szukalski, who died in 1987, hence copyright is not expired yet. Altenmann (talk) 21:50, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:55, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
1. This is a copy of file created by me – the uploader falsely claims it as his own work. 2. Thus, this image should be deleted per nomination as previously: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Toporzeł.svg. Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 14:48, 4 January 2023 (UTC) Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 14:54, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- I as the uploader pointed out that the author of this graphic is Stanisław Szukalski, so I do not claim myself as an author of this image.
- If it is a copy of file created by you, you can link your file as an answer. DerekTDR (talk) 15:10, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: no evidence of a PD license. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
MD shows not an own work. E4024 (talk) 00:29, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Keep This is my own work. I took this image as we drove through downtown. I uploaded a version to the commons and another version as File:May 28, 2020, Aftermath of George Floyd Riot in Columbus, Ohio.jpg. Gingerbreadhouse97 (talk) 14:51, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Please see Commons:Deletion requests/File:May 1, 2020 Ohio Anti-COVID-19 Lock-down Protest.jpg. --E4024 (talk) 19:41, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep based on other images and editing it's clear this user lives in the city and takes their own photos. ɱ (talk) 14:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Kept: insufficient reason for deletion. Own work asserted and not found elsewhere online. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:04, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete. MD shows not an own work. E4024 (talk) 00:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Keep. This is my own work. I took it as we drove by the protests. Gingerbreadhouse97 (talk) 14:50, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Question @E4024: Does the metadata show you something other than random characters? --Green Giant (talk) 17:03, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Nope. Those characters make me think this was in some social or other media and received comments which turned into random characters at upload. --E4024 (talk) 17:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep based on their other images and edits it's clear this user lives in the city and takes their own photos. ɱ (talk) 14:15, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- Possible. However my doubts about possible previous use are also valid. For some reason the uploader did not respond to that issue. Let's see what the closing admins think and do... --E4024 (talk) 14:43, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Kept: insufficient reason for deletion. Own work asserted and not found elsewhere online. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:04, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Sculptures are not covered by freedom of panorama in Denmark for commercial use, so this photo is not free enough for commons. Peter Alberti (talk) 10:05, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- I'm afraid thats right, so please delete. --Yazee (talk) 14:20, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
- Deleted per nomination. Thuresson (talk) 00:16, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0j43ur10x9M 92.47.78.239 00:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --✗plicit 10:12, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
File:US Navy Bureau of Medical History (IA SomeSystemOfTheNatureHereProposedJosephLovellsRemarksOnTheSickReportNorthernDepa).pdf
[edit]Notice on Page 4 references certain copyright portions in the work..... ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:46, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Refferal as a 'sculptural artwork' of recent origin. Are lighting designs copyrightable in the US? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:15, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 20:04, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Drawing of Alexandre Dumas, no information about author or when this drawing was first published. Thuresson (talk) 10:51, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- It seems quite obvious that the engraving itself and its publication are both of XIX century (together with this version it is based on this photograph) but I cannot find any clear proofs. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 23:08, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2760 - A simple google search solved the problem. It was in a book published in his lifetime and he died in 1870. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:39, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Drawing of Alexandre Dumas, no information about author or when this drawing was first published. Thuresson (talk) 10:51, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- It seems quite obvious that the engraving itself and its publication are both of XIX century (together with this version it is based on this photograph) but I cannot find any clear proofs. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 23:08, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2760 - A simple google search solved the problem. It was in a book published in his lifetime and he died in 1870. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:39, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by User:Mdd (2)
[edit]- File:Fotograaf in Diergaarde Blijdorp, 1 april 1987.jpg - Photo probably made by professional photographer of this zoo, Diergaarde Blijdorp
- File:Marcel Douwe Dekker in Cafe Costes, 1988.jpg
- File:Barwoela cast, 1991 (8).jpg - Photo from Flickr, on this website posted by Mdd, so also on Flickr the CC-BY-SA licence is not justified
- File:Marcel Douwe Dekker on CHAIR in Galerie KIS, Amsterdam, 1992 (1).jpg. In addition to the reason below, the artwork behind the person is probably copyrighted
- File:Theo Lalleman & Marcel Douwe Dekker, 1993.jpg, trimmed from next image
- File:Theo Lalleman, Marcel Douwe Dekker en hond, Rotterdam 1993.jpg
- File:Marcel Douwe Dekker, 1994.jpg, trimmed from next image
- File:Rotterdam designers at Casa Europea, Antwerpen 1994.jpg
- File:Rotterdam designers at Casa Europea, Antwerpen 1994 (2).jpg (same series as above)
- File:Multimedia Building artists at Erolife, 1995.jpg
- File:Trouwfeest, 20.10.95 16.13u.jpg
- File:Trouwfeest, 20.10.95 16.15u.jpg
- File:Trouwfeest, 20.10.95 16.10u.jpg (same series as above)
- File:Trouwfeest, 20.10.95 18.40u.jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
All of these photos are showing the uploader in person, User:Mdd. Mdd claims to be the author, but this appears highly unlikely. There is no evidence these image are indeed photographed by Mdd. Therefore I suspect copyright violations. --Elly (talk) 18:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The files below I am giving the benifit of the doubt and can be maintained unless somebody else judges in another way, Elly (talk) 18:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- File:PAK 91 - 06 - Atelier Marcel Douwe Dekker.jpg it is possible Mdd made these using a camera on a tripod and a self timer
- File:Marcel Douwe Dekker.jpg standard photo for passport, outside threshold of originality
- File:Marcel Douwe Dekker down.jpg per above
- File:Mdd.jpg, might be a selfie
Comment by Ellywa (reaction on removed text by Mdd)
[edit]you are not the owner of the copyright if a photo is made by unknown bystanders. These should be deleted. Permissions to publish photos by close relations should be sent to OTRS and are kept confidential. In any case your name as the author is not correct. Elly (talk) 12:25, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks, I will make some extra inquiries and contact people for permission. -- Mdd (talk) 20:02, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Good plan. If this process takes too long, the images can always be undeleted. Elly (talk) 10:46, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks, I have added numbers. Which of the numbers do you still question. -- Mdd (talk) 13:38, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
Rearrangement by Mdd
[edit]Based on the information that gathered a new listing is made: 16:32, 30 June 2020 (UTC). First update: 22:59, 30 June 2020.
- I. PHOTO'S WITH NO COPYRIGHT QUESTIONED
Self-timer, camera, concept and directions by Marcel Douwe Dekker:
- B. File:Barwoela cast, 1991 (8).jpg. Camera was on a tripod. There is a second image on the samen location, which I didn't share, see here.
- C. File:Rotterdam designers at Casa Europea, Antwerpen 1994.jpg. Camera was on a tripod quite high.
- D. File:Rotterdam designers at Casa Europea, Antwerpen 1994 (2).jpg. Camera was on a tripod quite high.
- E. File:PAK 91 - 06 - Atelier Marcel Douwe Dekker.jpg indeed camera on a tripod and a self timer in the corner
Selfie, camera, concept and directions by Marcel Douwe Dekker:
- F. File:Mdd.jpg, indeed a selfie and I can show dozens more in the same series, not online at the moment
- II. PHOTO'S WITH COPYRIGHT QUESTIONED
Photo outside threshold of originality according to Ellywa ; copyright claimed due to significant digital enhancements by Marcel Douwe Dekker:
- 1. File:Marcel Douwe Dekker.jpg standard photo for passport, This is new for me. the File:Adrianus Dingeman de Groot.jpg has exactly the same characteristics
Photo outside threshold of originality according to Ellywa ; copyright claimed due to significant digital enhancements by Mdd Photo of the original; concept and further enhancements by Marcel Douwe Dekker:
Copyright claimed due to camera, concept & direction by Marcel Douwe Dekker. Artist or bystander who took the picture are still unknown. Requiring legal advice from the trade union is in progress:
Concept is the registration of the wedding ceremony performance : Camera, concept & direction by Marcel Douwe Dekker. Artist who took the picture is most likely determined. Requiring written permission is in progress:
- 5A. File:Trouwfeest, 20.10.95 16.13u.jpg
- 5B. File:Trouwfeest, 20.10.95 16.15u.jpg
- 5C. File:Trouwfeest, 20.10.95 16.10u.jpg
Picture of chair exhibition : Camera, concept & direction by Marcel Douwe Dekker. Picture most likely taken by Willy Lamain. Establishing contacting and requiring permission is in progress:
Picture of an event at work: Concept & direction by Marcel Douwe Dekker. Picture taken by employee of Theun de Vries fotoservice at Blijdorp, 1986
- 7. File:Fotograaf in Diergaarde Blijdorp, 1 april 1987.jpg : Permission at Flickr ; Just background data : Copyright holder is Theun de Vries, who gave written permission for all re-use.
Picture donated to me by close relation, who didn't wanted to be unmentioned but gave verbal permission. Requiring written permission is in progress.
- 8. File:Theo Lalleman, Marcel Douwe Dekker en hond, Rotterdam 1993.jpg
- 9. File:Theo Lalleman & Marcel Douwe Dekker, 1993.jpg, derived from [8]
-- Mdd (talk) 16:32, 30 June 2020 (UTC) / Mdd (talk) 23:06, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- I think it is a lot less complicated than you suggest above. All 11 pictures that you numbered 1 to 8 are not made by you, therefore you cannot upload them as your own work nor can you claim copyright on those pictures and label them with a free licence. Only the maker of a picture has the copyright and can put a (any) licence on a picture. Since you don't have the copyright to those eleven pictures they need to be deleted (preferably asap) because of copyright violation.
- I will leave the conclusion about the other six photographs (the ones you numbered A to F and that you claim have been taken with a timer and by yourself) to Gebruiker:Ellywa
- Your English is oftentimes not very clear, but I wondered if you actually meant the opposite of "who didn't wanted to be unmentioned" (as in: who didn't wanted to be mentioned). Good evening, Ecritures (talk) 20:23, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Situation and text have been updated. I do think there is more to it, such as threshold, Flickr license, verbal permission, and written permission. -- Mdd (talk) 23:06, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- You might think so; but all the points you mention are not applicable here right at this moment. The only thing that matters is that these pictures are not your own work, you are not the maker of these files therefore you don't own the copyright. The Flickr license you refer to is that the one you have given yourself? As you are not the photographer you don't "own the right" to put any licence on work of others. You can simply not claim the work to be yours. Even when there is written consent somewhere that the maker agrees with you uploading their work to Commons you cannot do so by claiming it is "your own work". (The written consent should be sent to OTRS *before* you upload and not years later when it is noticed there are several problems with what you persistently and erroneously call 'your own work'. Verbal consent should be put in writing and be handled in the same way as described before). The threshold or originality refers for example to scans, digital copies of 2D work: let's take 2D work in the public domain. The person who for example digitises these PD 2D works cannot claim copyright themself since the mere digitising (or faithfully reproducing the 2D image) does not pass the threshold of originality. Ecritures (talk) 08:12, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- The complication here is that Elly piled up 18 pictures with nine different types of copyright circumstances. For this alone your generalization The only thing that matters is that these pictures are not your own work is bogus because some are.
- Situation and text have been updated. I do think there is more to it, such as threshold, Flickr license, verbal permission, and written permission. -- Mdd (talk) 23:06, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Now your argument "the Flickr license you refer to is that the one you have given yourself?" is also a complicating factor. More than a year ago I explicitly explained on my talk page, that The contributions I make to Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons are part of my research & development as independent artist. In this particular matter I have licensed my work on Flickr as an artist, and imported work from Flickr here as a Wikipedia associate.
- Since my start in 2004 I have been wearing multiple hats and in doing so I have made big and little mistakes. I try to keep improving my performance, but still may missed a spot here and there. Now Elly has mass nominate 18 pictures, and you Ecritures mass nominate also about 20 pictures. In that nomination I noticed one picture I have missed, and fully cooperated.
- So your generalization is bogus because it doesn't apply to all pictures. I would very much appreciate if you would take your disagreement with Elly concerning threshold to a more public place and sort it out. -- Mdd (talk) 12:36, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- I will not add more comments, enough is said imho for the sysops to take a desicion on the listed images. A note in Dutch for clarity and understandibility (I am not native in English) about " threshold of originality". Een simpele pasfoto, bijvoorbeeld gemaakt in een automaat of bij een fotograaf is voor zover ik weet "below threshold". Dus die kan iedereen publiceren. Maar ik kan momenteel niet vinden waar dit staat in het beleid van Commons. Voor een portretfoto waar de persoon goed geportretteerd is geldt dat niet. De lijn daartussen is natuurlijk vaag. Gebruik dus alleen voor standaard pasfoto's. Elly (talk) 12:53, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- So your generalization is bogus because it doesn't apply to all pictures. I would very much appreciate if you would take your disagreement with Elly concerning threshold to a more public place and sort it out. -- Mdd (talk) 12:36, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- This will be my last reaction too. First of all, I clearly stated that I was talking about " All 11 pictures that you numbered 1 to 8 are not made by you"; so your claim 'So your generalization is bogus because it doesn't apply to all pictures' is - to just mention one thing - not following the AGF habit we try and uphold when in contact with fellow Wikimedians. Artist or not (whatever that exactly entails) uploading copyrighted images or claiming work of others as your own is not a process anyone should endorse on Wikimedia Commons (and a as result on several language Wikipedia projects). Ecritures (talk) 08:38, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Verzoek tot opsplitsing van deze massa-nominatie
[edit]Hierbij verzoek ik tot afsluiting van deze massa-nominatie met behoud van iedere afbeelding, en indien daar behoefte aan bestaat individuele hernominatie en wel om de volgende redenen:
- De directe aanleiding tot de massanominatie lijkt het volgende commentaar te zijn op Wikipedia, zie hier.
- ...en dat door een persoon die zelf op flagrante wijze auteursrechten schendt door bijv File:Theo Lalleman, Marcel Douwe Dekker en hond, Rotterdam 1993.jpg deze foto als de zijne te claimen. Krijg ik nu een blokverzoek omdat ik dit aan de kaak stel? svp mdd nomineer deze foto en andere op Commons zelf voor verwijdering om je fout te herstellen. Elly (overleg) 28 jun 2020 09:58 (CEST)
- Ik heb zelf de indruk, dat daar een grove smadelijke aantijging gemaakt is, en dat er daarna hier op Commons een hopeloos ingewikkelde massa nominatie wordt ingezet waarbij er van alles bij getrokken wordt.
- Wat ik nog kwalijker blijf vinden is, dat ik hiervoor juist Ecritures had aangesproken op een vergelijkbaar geval dat ze geïmpliceerd had dat het Museum Rotterdam op grote schaal copyright had geschonden. Nadat ik er haar daar op diverse punten op had aangesproken, volgde er hier op Commons een eerdere massanominatie, waarbij in de verdere discussie nog allerlei GLAM partners het moesten ontgelden.
Ik heb sterk de indruk, dat Wikipedia procedures zijn ingezet om zaken te compliceren en te verbloemen. Het heeft er alle schijn van dat Elly op 28 June 2020 's avonds om 18:30u het bewijs wilde gaan leveren van de uitspraak, die ze die dag om 09:58u deed. Dat kan wat mij betreft echt niet.
Het betrof in eerste instantie de File:Theo Lalleman, Marcel Douwe Dekker en hond, Rotterdam 1993.jpg, waarvan ik nog steeds vind dat ik in het volle recht stond en sta om deze op Flickr en Commons te delen. Met de maker van de foto heb ik hierover duidelijke mondelinge afspraken gemaakt, dat zij niet vermeld wilde worden. Dit wordt volgens mij ook wel fictief makerschap genoemd, en dat zouden we hier volgens mij ook moeten erkennen. Maar dit alleen al kan een hele discussie opleveren.
Bij andere hierboven aangehaalde foto's zijn er weer andere omstandigheden. Iedere afbeelding heeft hier recht op een zorgvuldige behandeling, en dat schiet er hier bij in. Vandaar dit verzoek. -- Mdd (talk) 11:02, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: *Mixed Close* -> kept those claimed as timer selfies and selfies and removed the ones by other authors. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:43, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Bereits bearbeitet 2003:DD:D720:2614:2CB4:D3EC:F32D:D907 12:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Wenn du Nina bist, melde dich bitte an und bestätige den Löschantrag. --Achim (talk) 12:33, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --A.Savin 20:56, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Freedom of panorama in Denmark does not cover works of art like this. Peter Alberti (talk) 10:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 20:03, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Wrong date in meta-data - Not necessarily PD-US-Expired. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:03, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Unless there contra evidence, {{PD-US-not renewed}} can apply. --Fæ (talk) 08:07, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- I've looked through the Copyright Office search, and whilst the publishers do seem to have filed copyright registrations for 1978 issues onward, I can't (so far) find any mention of the title in the renewals for 1977 or 1978 (under periodicals). Whilst the scanned copies have what like like a (c) stamp on the covers, I've not so far found a visible notice in the Periodical itself. I would appreciate a third opinion though.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- The original registrations (for 1950) are in:
- CCE 3rd Series Vol. 4 Part 2 Number 1 (Page 5)
- CCE 3rd Series Vol. 5 Part 2 Number 2 (Page 159)
- CCE 3rd Series Vol. 5 Part 2 Number 1 (Page 6)
Might need someone to check for individual contributions though.ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:41, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- An unexpected consequence might be that we can upload the rest of the issues up to 1978 inclusive. --Fæ (talk) 08:50, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- That I would exceptionally cautious about doing.. Might need someone to contact the Packard Campus people directly, or when the US is out of lockodown physically check the card index for renewals. Being a periodical, individual adverts or images within it, might have their own copyrights though, which would subsist regardless of the status of the periodical as I understand it. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:58, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- You mean 1964 though, as anything after that 'auto-renewed'. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:48, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- (CSN0000299)(TX0000064181) in1977 is the earliest record I can find for the title in the online search. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 09:10, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- And looking at the printed CCE volumes the publishers do seem to have filed for original issues in 1977, So I strongly think they did file for original registrations in previous years (but not necessarily for Renewals).. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:11, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: I haven't found that copyright was renewed, too. Kept as PD-US-not renewed. --rubin16 (talk) 12:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
File:Mitchell Camera Corporation 666 West Harvard Street Glendale California ad detail, from- American cinematographer. (Vol. 31, 1950) (IA americancinemato31unse) (page 13 crop).jpg
[edit]_(IA_americancinemato31unse)_(page_13_crop).jpg){kind=link}
_(IA_americancinemato31unse)_(page_13_crop).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Source work had worng publication date in meta-data , so this cannot be assumed as expired as reasoned in good faith. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 08:05, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- Please, delete for reason stated above. Thanks. --Tibet Nation (talk) 22:57, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Please, see discussion here: [26] and separately, this ad does not have a copyright notice on it. So, if the complete periodical is retained within the Commons, then this fact that this ad does not have any copyright notice should then be considered. Thanks, --Tibet Nation (talk) 13:42, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Kept: kept as File:American cinematographer. (Vol. 31, 1950) (IA americancinemato31unse).pdf. --rubin16 (talk) 12:40, 1 June 2021 (UTC)