Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2020/10/04
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
Appears to be a screenshot of a mobile game (not sure which and too lazy to Google), very unlikely to be own work and probably a copyvio as a screenshot of a non-free product GeneralNotability (talk) 02:41, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Copyrighted material. —Teles «Talk to me ˱C L @ S˲» 03:26, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
uji-coba N219 (talk) 02:41, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, G7. --Túrelio (talk) 11:57, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Because it is Nonsense ECM WIKICOMMONS (talk) 09:50, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- @ECM WIKICOMMONS: What do you mean? If you are not satisfied with the introduction, you can change it by yourself. 轻语者 (talk) 10:43, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Herby talk thyme 10:57, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Moved page to File:Mauretania2 in New York 1950s.jpg, because there was an obvious error in the last file. 79.151.31.247 11:21, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No need to delete a redirect. --Achim (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
This image was taken from a website and is, most likely, a copyright violation. Farragutful (talk) 12:49, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright at source (& likely derivative anyway) + spam - gone. --Herby talk thyme 13:32, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
I uploaded this picture. I want it deleted Please do not hesitate. Do it now!! I have been here for 2 days, the majority of which has been hassle. I have thousands of pictures I might have contributed. But I have seen no sign that anybody wants me here or welcomes my contributions in any way. Please, yes, delete this picture. Do it as soon as possible. This place is not worth the trouble and tears. I am working to leave ASAP, clearing out evidence that I ever crossed the threshold at all. I see no evidence that you actually want my pictures here. So I can't see why I should upload any more. I would like assistance to take ALL of them down. So hey, Jeff G. & Rodhullandemu, I accept that I am immeasurably inferior to both of you. I look forward to leaving your company and never seeing you again. Just a little matter of cleaning up as a head out the door. Or will you now refuse to delete, since I want it to happen?
This file was initially tagged by Jeff G. as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Artist Gladys Caldwell Fisher died in 1952, her copyright on "Kiowa Travois" lasts through 1952+95=2047. Artist Gladys Caldwell Fisher died in 1952, her copyright on her relief sculpture "Kiowa Travois" lasts through 1952+95=2047. COM:FOP US does not permit uploading of the photo here, but en:WP:F should permit uploading of a photo of the sculpture to her article to English Wikipedia for Fair Use in her article there. Converted from speedy for FOP discussion. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 10:10, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
PUBLIC DOMAIN
I tried to add more to the pictures themselves, but they are already gone. Deleted in the dark of night while I was sleeping. No chance to defend myself.
You don't treat new users very well around here. That's already obvious.
Here's why you don't delete those pictures: Post Office Murals are public domain. Says so on Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_post_office_murals
The photograph I posted itself is not public domain. It came out of my camera. The artwork which forms PART of the picture is public domain. I knew you'd never believe me, so I put the link to Wikipedia to prove it.
I would have put an explanation on the picture itself, but you deleted it so quickly I never got a chance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Largely Forgotten (talk • contribs) 14:23, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Largely Forgotten: This photo has not even been deleted, it is being discussed. en:United States post office murals doesn't mention "PUBLIC DOMAIN" or a contract transferring rights, and the artist was not employed by the post office. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:39, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Delete Sculptures in the United States do not benefit from Freedom of Panorama. The uploader should take a little time to learn the law on which our policies are based. Rodhullandemu (talk) 14:30, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Your arguments are irrelevant, have zero bearing on the situation. Post office murals are PUBLIC DOMAIN. It says so right on Wikipedia, for heaven's sake. Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_post_office_murals
I may be a new user here, but that does not mean you know better than I do on this point.
From Largely Forgotten: This is like a nightmare. I post of picture of my own, containing as part of it, some public domain art. Now I'm being chased through the night, sniped at from dark corners I cannot even see. I am running, out of breath, trying to find a safe place. Trying to defend myself. I consider "The uploader should take a little time to learn the law on which our policies are based" to be disdainful and dismissive, even if they were right. But they were wrong.
Bit at this point, go ahead and delete it. I will make an altered version of the picture and upload again. Today. With a very, very long explanation about how the post office murals were created. About how they are public domain. Kind of bizarre that Jeff G. did all the research to find the artist's bio, but missed the part about how post office murals are public domain. You don't treat new users well here. That's one thing I know for sure. Please delete the picture, and quit harassing me, especially since you are wrong about this. Wikipedia says so, these murals are public domain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_post_office_murals
Now I'll go cry for a bit before I do the modified upload with a long essay about why they are PUBLIC DOMAIN. If you try and delete that one, I will request that all the photos I have posted be delete and I will go away and never come back. Your welcome committee sucks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Largely Forgotten (talk • contribs) 15:03, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Hey, Rodhullandemu. I understand that I am not worthy of your heightened self. And I understand you think my contributions are unworthy too. Got it. Totally understood. Really, truly.
Comment I'm so sorry that you find our policies somewhow different from your imagination, but you've not yet provided convincing evidence that this sculpture is public domain. Perhaps you'd care to try that before you throw your toys out of the pram, huh? Rodhullandemu (talk) 15:11, 4 October 2020 (UTC)- @Largely Forgotten: Exactly where in that article or US law does it say that any relief sculpture created in the US by a US citizen and commissioned by the US Postal Service is in the Public Domain? Pinging @Clindberg for his expertise on this matter. Also, as an important distinction, US 2D murals are covered by COM:FOP US, while 3D sculptures are not, and the photographed artwork is not a mural, but a sculpture. In addition, since you consistently refuse to sign your posts, I refuse to sign them for you. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:23, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Hey Jeff G. You want to taunt a new user for not signing "correctly"? I barely figured out how to comment at all. I guess you aren't part of the welcome team. Anyhow, you wanna take down my pictures of post office murals, then maybe you ought to go after the rest of them, too, not just me. Ditto on Rod-whatever it is. You want to go after me, go after these, too.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Largely Forgotten (talk • contribs) 15:54, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Some of these were created by Federal employees in the course of their duty, hence are properly Public Domain. However, the project was open to local artists who were not Federal employees, and their works are copyrighted until 70 years after their deaths. The only get-out would be a reliance on COM:FOP US, but in this case, it's a relief, a type of sculpture, and there is no Freedom of Panorama in the US for sculptures. That's it in a nutshell. Rodhullandemu (talk) 16:10, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Per this, the work was installed in 1939. The U.S. term then, at a maximum, is 95 years from publication (not the author's death). So, it would be PD in 2034 at the latest. Per Commons:Public art and copyrights in the US#Before 1978, a work displayed in a place where people were free to take photographs was published, per case law at the time. As a result, works needed to have a copyright notice on them, otherwise they became PD immediately upon installation. I see no copyright notice on it, and the notice would have needed to be perceivable by the public to be valid. Secondly, even if there was a notice, since it was before 1964 there would also need to be a renewal, which should have been filed in 1967 (though sometimes you also check 1966 to see if it was filed a bit early but accepted, or 1968 in case it was filed so late in 1967 that it wasn't printed until the next year's volumes). So even if there was a notice, we would need to show there was a valid renewal in those years. I have not done that search, because I see no notice -- so the work should be {{PD-US-no notice}}, and the photo should be fine.
- For a DR, I would expect someone to find the renewal. FoP stuff is usually complex enough that it should never be speedied. It's certainly fair to bring up the topic, but stuff installed in the U.S. before 1978 is frequently fine, so it should be more carefully checked with regards to the law before bringing up DRs. Works installed after 1978 are usually not OK, due to the change to the definition of publication that year (and of course the lack of notice requirements from 1989 on, and the change in terms to 70pma).
- I do notice that the photographer has requested deletion in the description. If they still want to delete in light of the above, that should be taken into consideration, as an author's request. But I don't see any copyright reason to take it down. Carl Lindberg (talk) 17:05, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per uploader's request. Thanks to Carl for his expertise!. --Achim (talk) 19:57, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Insufficiently described unused private photo of unknown man - out of scope. ŠJů (talk) 01:06, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Not only "out of scope" but also not an "own work". Could be speedied as F10 instead of adding to the DR backlog. --E4024 (talk) 01:09, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted, small unused personal photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 08:04, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Túrelio as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://www.pbdc.net/2020/05/23/anniversary-of-the-mahaparinirvana-of-ven-khenchen-palden-sherab-rinpoche-june-19/
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as uploader protested. -- Túrelio (talk) 08:40, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- As the uploader of image, I've tagged it for a speedydelete, with the reason that after statement by author was provided to @Túrelio, user continued to challenge fair use. Additional statements by author are not possible, due to respect for privacy concerns. There was no need to present the file on the discussion board if the double-down on the challenge had been clarified. I also deleted previous responses made before the double-down was read, since no replies were posted. Thanks. Pasdecomplot (talk) 16:02, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader also agrees to delete. Uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 07:49, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
This image is marked as "This image is in the public domain according to Greek copyright law (Paragraph 5 of Article II, Law 2121 of 1993) because it shows or is part of an official text expressive of the authority of the State, notably a legislative, administrative or judicial text." (PD-GreekGov), while it certainly is not a text Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:52, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete People sometimes think that {{PD-GreekGov}} is similar to {{PD-USGov}} but it is not even close. Any governmental work is by default fully copyrighted. And it does not even look that it was ever published with any license by the government. The image is widely distributed, but it is not found in any government website. In one of the websites it is credited as "© EUROKINISSI/ΓΡΑΦΕΙΟ ΤΥΠΟΥ ΠΡΩΘΥΠΟΥΡΓΟΥ/ΔΗΜΗΤΡΗΣ ΠΑΠΑΜΗΤΣΟΣ" (Eurokinissi photo agency / Prime Minister's Press Office / Dimitris Papamitsos [photographer - but non government employee] ) Given this mention, the photo is copyrighted and Eurokinissi has the rights of distribution. While there is mention of the PM's office the photo is not found on the PM's website, and even if it was found the whole website is under CC-BY-ND (proof that it would never be PD). -Geraki TLG 14:38, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete As the person who uploaded this, it was my mistake. Many news websites from Greece attributed this to the Greek Government and the Prime Minister's office. I'm not Greek, and I do not know the copyright laws there. Sorry folks. Destroyeraa (talk) 18:44, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete PD-GreekGov only includes the "official text expressive of the authority of the State". Images obviously don't fall into this criteria. --A1Cafel (talk) 08:41, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 13:08, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Non-skol Мотешето Авакаито (talk) 14:45, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Sealle (talk) 06:46, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Lo subí por error LEANDRO RENÉ (talk) 16:34, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: and redirected as duplicate. --JuTa 00:35, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:42, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Original with EXIF was uploaded. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:58, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
Cropped image from Google Street View (URL : [1]). The location of cars and people in the image, as well as the display of electric signs, is very similar to Google Street View. スイス山梨県 (talk) 06:01, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 00:37, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:30, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:49, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:02, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 16:53, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Unused duplicate of File:Korea Spring of Insadong 08.jpg, but cropped differently and slightly edited. ƏXPLICIT 00:11, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
This is an F10 but due to the time it has been here I open an unnecessary DR. Please delete it ASAP. E4024 (talk) 03:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:56, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
"FBMD" in metadata indicates Facebook photo Ytoyoda (talk) 04:32, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:13, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Out Of Scope. -- burts ∞ 17:00, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:14, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope, image from blocked user Lotje (talk) 06:11, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:14, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope, image from blocked user Lotje (talk) 06:29, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:57, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope, image from blocked user Lotje (talk) 06:30, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:57, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Town hall of Le Havre
[edit]- File:FR-LH-rathaus.jpg
- File:Noel 2009, Le Havre, illuminations 2.jpg
- File:Le Havre (France) Town hall illuminations (3).JPG
- File:Le Havre (France) town hall Illuminations december 2012 (1).JPG
- File:Le Havre Place Hôtel de Ville R02.jpg
- File:Le Havre, hôtel de ville.jpg
- File:Le Havre, the City Rebuilt by Auguste Perret-113529.jpg
- File:Le Havre, the City Rebuilt by Auguste Perret-113531.jpg
- File:Le Havre, the City Rebuilt by Auguste Perret-113533.jpg
- File:LehavrePlaceHoteldeVille.jpg
- File:Lighting fountain, Le Havre, christmas 2009.jpg
- File:Panorama lh.JPG
- File:Place de l'Hôtel de Ville du Havre pendant les fêtes de fin d'année.jpg
- File:Rathaus Le Havre 01.jpg
- File:Rathaus Le Havre 02.jpg
VIGNERON (talk) 07:49, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Keep File:Panorama lh.JPG as de minimis (cityscape view). Delete the rest per no FoP in France. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 03:03, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Town hall of Le Havre
[edit]No FoP in France, architect Auguste Perret died in 1954 and Jacques Tournant died in 2005
- File:Hôtel de Ville du Havre (49744713108).jpg
- File:Hôtel de Ville du Havre (50869623372).jpg
- File:Le Havre - Hôtel de ville.jpg
- File:Le Havre 01.jpg
- File:Le Havre 02.jpg
- File:Le Havre Town Hall.jpg
A1Cafel (talk) 03:29, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 11:50, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Small photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. I suspect not own work, but copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 08:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:14, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 10:43, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:58, 11 October 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) 14:27, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:15, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:46, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:15, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:15, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Personal essay, out of scope. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 15:02, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:59, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Homework, out of scope. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 15:02, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:59, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
No Commons:Freedom of panorama in Ukraine. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:04, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:17, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Irynarybakova93 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
- File:3агс.jpg
- File:Репорт 19.jpg
- File:Колоннаввввввв.jpg
- File:Пппі.jpg
- File:Впост.jpg
- File:Репорт 26.jpg
- File:ДмитроБрижинський3.jpg
- File:ДмитроБрижинський2.jpg
- File:ДмитроБрижинський1.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:05, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 03:08, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Christian Remchen (talk · contribs)
[edit]Modern art and promo photos. I think artist identity/permission confirmation via Commons:OTRS is necessary.
- File:Geburtstagsporträt.jpg
- File:Badende am Strand.jpg
- File:Buch "Die sieben Brücken der Malerei".jpg
- File:Die sieben Brücken der Malerei.jpg
- File:Sonnenuntergang und Taube.jpg
- File:Bleistift Engel.jpg
- File:Autoporträt.jpg
- File:Hohntor Bad Neustadt.jpg
- File:Fachwerk Bleistift.jpg
- File:Porträ.jpg
- File:Kinderporträt.jpg
- File:Beruf Clown.jpg
- File:Die Rettung.jpg
- File:Busard.jpg
- File:5 Element, Äther.jpg
- File:Bleistiftsporträt.jpg
- File:Kunstakademie Remchen.ogv
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:07, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 03:11, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:16, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:13, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:16, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:16, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:16, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:17, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:16, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kayla.Hotz (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/nconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:26, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:16, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:28, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:16, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by BonzooPippenpadolopsicopolisTheThird (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: trivial logos of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. Not used or used in unapproved draft.
- File:The Outspoken Oppa Logo.jpg
- File:Screen-shot-2019-09-19-at-7.18.52-pm-1 (1).png
- File:Screen-shot-2019-09-19-at-7.18.52-pm-1.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:30, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:17, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:35, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:17, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Olivierh97 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:37, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:17, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sera Escobar de Valle (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:43, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 03:33, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Complex logo, not used in any content pages. No evidence it is the uploader's "own work." Ixfd64 (talk) 17:52, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:18, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Complex logo, not used in any content pages. No evidence that it is released under a Creative Commons license. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:18, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Out of project scope, not used in any content pages. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:18, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Self promotion. Useless potentially non-free files.
- File:Cadooz Logo mitClaim 4c.jpg
- File:BestChoice Logo 4c.jpg
- File:Yamando logo.jpg
- File:Cadooz logo.jpg
XXN, 18:52, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:19, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Low-resolution unused text logo as JPG. XXN, 19:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:19, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Dangerzone2014 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope (unused personal photos) and likely copyvio
- File:124564roro.jpg
- File:Danger Zone Boss shit.jpg
- File:Danger Zone kerry hyder.jpg
- File:DZ Snow.jpg
- File:Danger zone at the beatstars conference.jpg
- File:DZTR52.jpg
- File:RORO512.jpg
- File:Vmg2211.jpg
- File:DZ dat be me.jpg
- File:Dangerzone2k17.jpg
- File:Danger Zone- All I Fear - The 2nd chance edition .jpg
- File:Danger Zone Truth Revealed.jpg
- File:Danger zone Truth Revealed.jpg
- File:Danger Zone and Rome after Rome's heart transplant.jpg
- File:VMG Logo.jpg
- File:DZ promo.jpg
- File:Danger Zone- All I Fear.jpg
AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 20:25, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 03:16, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope: low quality, no educational use forseeable, unused personal photo. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 20:29, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:19, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. If the subject covered in the text is notable (which is unlikely), an article on Wikipedia should be created instead. Ahmadtalk 20:30, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:19, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kiagus Muhammad Hanif Sirua (talk · contribs)
[edit]Same as the previous requests, unlikely to be own work, missing EXIF, and believed copyvio.
- File:Visit Kubu Raya.png
- File:Kubu Raya Flag.png
- File:Riza Herdavid.png
- File:Nursyamsu.jpg
- File:Justiar Noer 2.png
- File:Jamro.jpg
- File:Bendera Simuelue.jpg
- File:Bendera Empat Lawang.jpg
- File:Visit Banyuwangi.png
--Symphonium264 (talk) 09:04, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 04:36, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Geraki as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Not "part of an official text expressive of the authority of the State, notably a legislative, administrative or judicial text." The source website claims that the photo is provided by the governement but cannot be found in any governmental website, and even if, it would still be copyrighted (does not belong to exceptions). Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:47, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete This image is currently uploaded under PD-GreekGov, which says (in English): "This image is in the public domain according to Greek copyright law (Paragraph 5 of Article II, Law 2121 of 1993) because it shows or is part of an official text expressive of the authority of the State, notably a legislative, administrative or judicial text.". I do not think this image is "an official text", in fact, it isn't a text at all. Given the legitimity of marking this file as a copyright has been challenged by the file uploader (cf [2]), I'm starting a full deletion discussion. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:49, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete as per my original explanation. People sometimes think that {{PD-GreekGov}} is simmilar to {{PD-USGov}} but it is not even close. Any governmental work is by default fully copyrighted. And it does not even look that it was ever published with any license by the government. Most likely is from a journalist/photo agency, the same picture is also in other websites with no credit mention [3][4]. --Geraki TLG 14:15, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per Martin. PD-GreekGov only includes the "official text expressive of the authority of the State". Images obviously don't fall into this criteria. --A1Cafel (talk) 08:41, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per above. My mistake. Won't be uploading anything else from outside the US anymore, since I'm not familiar with the other countries' copyright laws.Destroyeraa (talk) 13:03, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 04:32, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:29, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 04:31, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Inferior version of File:Univar logo.jpg uploaded by same author, not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:46, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 04:30, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Inferior duplicate of File:Medal Nicolae testemiteanu.png by the same user. XXN, 18:33, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 04:30, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Low-resolution (thumbnails) unused logos/emblems of poor quality.
XXN, 19:32, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 04:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
What scope have we got here? (Unused file) E4024 (talk) 19:51, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 04:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Professional promo image crosswiki uploaded automatically as "own work". Could be own work or maybe uploaded by someone who didn't understand the licensing requirements? Article was deleted so also Out of scope. kyykaarme (talk) 19:46, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; PCP. --Gbawden (talk) 09:30, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Small file w/o camera EXIF, dubious "own work". E4024 (talk) 19:48, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:30, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Small file w/o camera EXIF, + WM; dubious "own work". E4024 (talk) 19:49, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:30, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Small file w/o camera EXIF, dubious "own work" by a one-time-only visitor. E4024 (talk) 19:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:30, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Friedenskirche (Freiburg) 2.jpg. Architect of this church died in 1994, no freedom of panorama for interior spaces in Germany. (Though I deleted the other image, I'm nominating this regularly to follow procedure). Gestumblindi (talk) 20:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:30, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Small file w/o camera EXIF, dubious "own work". E4024 (talk) 21:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:30, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 16:00, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Unused smaller copy of File:100hgxe.jpg E4024 (talk) 00:27, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 09:24, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work as claimed- previously published in 2006 as a book cover. [5] Needs OTRS permission. Spicy (talk) 01:22, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 09:25, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
sourced to problematic Flickr account; see discussion at Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Blanca_II_de_Navarra.jpg Eric talk 01:44, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Suppression ridicule encore une fois. C'est une œuvre dans le domaine public. --Capbourrut (talk) 07:22, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- C'est à dire...? Eric talk 02:15, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- So is the source dodgy? I did browse the Internet, with no reliable sources for it the image. I am baffled, but is this possibly a fake image? Iñaki LL (talk) 12:44, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
- That's what I'm assuming. Did you take a look at the discussion I linked above? Eric talk 23:29, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
- So is the source dodgy? I did browse the Internet, with no reliable sources for it the image. I am baffled, but is this possibly a fake image? Iñaki LL (talk) 12:44, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
- C'est à dire...? Eric talk 02:15, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Eric: I did, now in more detail. It is disappointing, but based on the evidence provided, it does not look genuine or legit. Iñaki LL (talk) 15:07, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. It's unfortunate as this is a highly used image but after reading the linked discussions, the evidence is that the image is fake. --Podzemnik (talk) 09:28, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
pedophilia 178.176.165.136 06:00, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Kept like Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stratz - Körper des Kindes 23.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stratz - Körper des Kindes 29.jpg etc. — putnik? 07:08, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Depicting an underage child. 124.171.69.9 07:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: I don't see a valid reason for deletion. --Podzemnik (talk) 09:32, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
COM:SCOPE, Artwork without obvious educational use. SCP-2000 08:00, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 09:33, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
Unused file. Would appear to be a personal artwork of no educational value. Malcolma (talk) 17:31, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 09:34, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
content not de minimus SecretName101 (talk) 00:11, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 13:52, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
content not de minimus SecretName101 (talk) 00:11, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 13:52, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
copyrighted content not de minimus SecretName101 (talk) 00:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 13:52, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
Taken from the subject’s Instagram, no credit given to photographer: https://www.instagram.com/p/BYw8iy2hrgb/?igshid=1w6cqlmmaw81u Ytoyoda (talk) 04:14, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Please remove this for deletion Mulman82 (talk) 05:21, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- The uploader has pointed out that photograpgrapher credit is in the Instagram link and I stand corrected. However, there are a couple of issues, @Mulman82: .
- Previously published photos require license verification through COM:OTRS (please read the directions there).
How is Liam Mulhall the photographer when Liam Mulhall is shown holding a rugby ball?If your girlfriend took the photograph as you clarified here, then she is the copyright owner, regardless of whose camera she used. Ytoyoda (talk) 05:41, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion: Missing permission. --Wdwd (talk) 13:57, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
Cette photo a été prise sur le site de l'Académie de Montpellier, dont le contenu est protégé. La personne qui l'a déposée a été avertie ici et sur WP. Pierrette13 (talk) 12:45, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 08:39, 12 Oktober 2020 UTC: No permission since 4 October 2020 --Krdbot 21:10, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Église Notre-Dame-des-Mines
[edit]- File:Church of Notre-Dame-des-Mines of Combes 01.jpg
- File:Church of Notre-Dame-des-Mines of Combes 02.jpg
- File:Church of Notre-Dame-des-Mines of Combes 03.jpg
- File:Church of Notre-Dame-des-Mines of Combes 04.jpg
- File:Church of Notre-Dame-des-Mines of Combes 05.jpg
- File:Church of Notre-Dame-des-Mines of Combes 06.jpg
- File:Clocher de l'église N-D-des-Mines.JPG
- File:Eglise Notre-Dame-des-Mines à Combes.JPG
- File:Entrée principale de l'église N-D-des-Mines.JPG
- File:Façades et toitures de l'église N-D-des-Mines.JPG
VIGNERON (talk) 13:58, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pymouss Let’s talk - 21:16, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Église Notre-Dame-des-Mines
[edit]VIGNERON (talk) 12:29, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: still no OTRS confirmation. --JuTa 05:07, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Booksworm Photos
[edit]- File:Aigues Mortes 4.JPG
- File:Aigues Mortes 1.JPG
- File:Aigues Mortes 3.JPG
- File:Aigues Mortes 2.JPG
- File:Barrel sign.JPG
- File:Lavender dry.JPG
- File:Prayer flag close.jpg
- File:Pink flower dew.jpg
- File:Rose with insect.jpg
- File:Irony Swatch bw.jpg
- File:Swatch Irony angle below.jpg
- File:Swatch Irony angle below bw.jpg
- File:DSCF1214.jpg
- File:Limmat in Zurich.jpg
- File:Bee pollinating Lavender.JPG
- File:Lavandula Lavender.JPG
- File:Lavandula Lavender single.JPG
- File:Autumn leaves basel.JPG
- File:Flaming wood.JPG
As copyright holder of these works, and given that these photographs are used on no project pages, I request their speedy deletion --Booksworm (talk) 00:27, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- In addition, the majority of these images are of relatively low quality and serve no educational purpose. Booksworm (talk) 18:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, after so many years you are not taking away any pic even if it is not used; they belong to the humanity. Keep. E4024 (talk) 00:48, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- "Belong to humanity"? Esoteric thoughts aren't what determine ownership over copyright Booksworm (talk) 18:12, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- Keep You have been not copyright owner when you uploaded these files. 轻语者 (talk) 10:29, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- But as I made the photos, I am the copyright holder. Booksworm (talk) 18:12, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Booksworm: Please read COM:L. 轻语者 (talk) 14:23, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- @轻语者: I read the policy. It doesn't strip me of my rights as the creator (and copyright holder) of the work. But nice try. Booksworm (talk) 14:52, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- But as I made the photos, I am the copyright holder. Booksworm (talk) 18:12, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Commons licenses are irrevocable. I deleted one or two poor quality ones. --Gbawden (talk) 08:22, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
We have a better and larger image at File:Aytos City Sign.jpg. None of the uploads of this user have camera EXIF and they are all small. IMHO let's delete the replaceable ones per COM:PCP. E4024 (talk) 02:16, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:23, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Small file w/o camera EXIF; dubious "own work". (Thank God it is not in use, so hopefully nobody will get mad at me for asking the deletion of an image of their favourite singer. :) E4024 (talk) 02:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:22, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
C-SPAN files not from the chambers of the US House/Senate only allows non-commercial use A1Cafel (talk) 03:33, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Nomination is most likely valid; I created the image before I knew CSPAN rights only extended to in-chamber footage. Bri (talk) 02:02, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:22, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
The rights to a photo usually belong to the person who took the photo (per The Legal Genealogist. I don't see any proof at the cited source that this photo has the proper permissions. Shearonink (talk) 05:41, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's been over three weeks since this file was nominated for deletion. Is there a policy reason why it hasn't been deleted yet? Shearonink (talk) 14:10, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:23, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Copyright violation. Metadata contradict copyright claim as given in message to OTRS. Mussklprozz (talk) 06:39, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; still no OTRS. --Gbawden (talk) 08:23, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Cage died in 1992, so COM:OTRS required. Achim (talk) 09:51, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- In addition, there is a copyright note at the bottom of the drawing. --Achim (talk) 08:39, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:40, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
Use says "own work" but the picture clearly says the copyright is owned by Decca Records Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:47, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:40, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Cape Verde A1Cafel (talk) 03:35, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- IMHO this image is about the taxis; the background is DM and I do not see any artistic graffiti or mural even if I look specially at the wall. Keep. --E4024 (talk) 03:51, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No recognisable artwork. --Gbawden (talk) 12:02, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Patrick Rogel as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: F10 — billinghurst sDrewth 10:57, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. 𝕃𝐖 (talk) 15:06, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; likely copyvio. --Gbawden (talk) 12:11, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
The file is an image taken during the 2020 Belorussian protests, in which it is found on an Instagram post that was published on 2020-08-14, much earlier than this image's upload date. Given that this is the only upload of the uploader, the file may be copyrighted and unfree, and will need to go through OTRS for dubious copyright status. 廣九直通車 (talk) 13:08, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete, @廣九直通車: just please note that Belarus doesn't have FOP, hence such things can never be free even though OTRS. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:07, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:11, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
This is one of the first files I uploaded as a test to Commons and due to it's poor quality and on top of that violation of personality rights I would like for it to be removed. NeoMeesje (talk) 14:19, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; courtesy deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 12:13, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
This is one of the first files I uploaded as a test to Commons and due to it's poor quality and on top of that violation of personality rights I would like for it to be removed. NeoMeesje (talk) 14:19, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; courtesy deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 12:14, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Szabó Nándor Emil (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:39, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:17, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Without metadata, not enough evidence of own work; user with history of copyvio Frodar (talk) 18:48, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete available on a page archived to archive.org on 2 November 2016, before upload here.[6] Verbcatcher (talk) 23:51, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:18, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Niet relevant Arnold Bartels (talk) 19:14, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 12:18, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
There is no proof at the cited source that 1)the school relinquished its rights and 2)that the school actually holds the rights to this photo. Shearonink (talk) 05:25, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- And, besides, if it really is a Little League photo why would the school - and not the Little League team or the photographer - be the one to relinquish rights to the image? Little League teams are usually not affiliated with elementary schools are they?... Shearonink (talk) 14:38, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- It's been over three weeks since this file was nominated for deletion. Is there a policy reason why it hasn't been deleted yet? Shearonink (talk) 14:09, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- A month and a half...I guess these things take time. Shearonink (talk) 21:42, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- They do; especially when the file is used. I added some tag to the file, maybe that will attract the attention to this DR. Best. --E4024 (talk) 17:55, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
- A month and a half...I guess these things take time. Shearonink (talk) 21:42, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
- It's been over three weeks since this file was nominated for deletion. Is there a policy reason why it hasn't been deleted yet? Shearonink (talk) 14:09, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and as source-site says "Copyright © 1999-2019 C. Shepard.". --Túrelio (talk) 19:48, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
Unused fictitious flag; out of COM:SCOPE as not realistically useful for an educational purpose. Keφr (keep talk here) 06:57, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
User:Kephir has been taken to the "User problems" noticeboard on two separate occasions over "Special and fictional flags" deletion nomination requests and his revenge deletion nomination requests against people who opposed them (once, twice), and has received a conspicuous lack of support for certain problematic aspects of his way of operating. At an absolute minimum, I would strongly recommend that all Kephir's "special or fictional flags" deletion proposals using the same problematic cut-and-pasted boilerplate one-size-fits-all cookie-cutter text be automatically rejected until Kephir has modified his behavior so that it does not appear to have a goal of stirring up turbulence and turmoil among the Commons community. [Non-admin closure.] AnonMoos (talk) 16:58, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Unused fictitious flag; out of COM:SCOPE as not realistically useful for an educational purpose. Keφr (keep talk here) 17:16, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
- I really don't think it shows any degree of "good faith" on the part of User:Kephir to return to doing exactly what there were many previous objections to his doing, as soon as his one-week ban has expired. In fact (as with a number of aspects of the later phases of Kephir's career on Commons), it's very easy to deduce that there's a certain spiteful and malicious component to Kephir cutting-and-pasting in yet again one more time the exact same one-size-fits-all boilerplate cookie-cutter text which has been a point of controversy. Again, I strongly recommend that all of Kephir's "special or fictional flags" deletion proposals using the same problematic cut-and-pasted text be automatically rejected until and unless Kephir makes some tangible effort to show that he can change his patterns of behavior in order to work well with others (and not just ignoring all comments and concerns so that he continues with exactly the same ways of working that he started with, which have caused friction). [Non-admin closure.] AnonMoos (talk) 19:50, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
unused fictional flag Denniss (talk) 07:21, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, no educational value, out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:10, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
And also
Abracadabra in name. Any metadata. low-re image, unlikely to be own work. Микола Василечко (talk) 07:43, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: all taken on same day, uploaded on same day, consistent series, not found elsewhere online using Google Images. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:17, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Not enough evidence of own work; user with history of copyvio Frodar (talk) 18:48, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete crop of larger image with a copyright notice that was posted online before upload here: image 21 of 22 linked from here. Verbcatcher (talk) 23:35, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:23, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
This is from CIMSS webpage and likely copyrighted. The uploader cannot therefore give à GFDL license to it. Pierre cb (talk) 23:30, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: at the "About this blog" page, it says: "The images contained on this blog are in the public domain". --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:29, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
This satellite picture is taken from a copyrighted website (https://www.mprnews.org/story/2019/09/01/florida-braces-for-category-5-hurricane-dorian). Pierre cb (talk) 23:36, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:27, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
License template removed by 117.249.215.96 (talk · contribs) with comment This is a copyrighted official logo of Unistam Groups. Unistam appears to be an Indian company, and this logo is borderline on COM:TOO India and COM:TOO US. Likely also out of scope as an unused logo. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:26, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Good faith: Requested to me by the Uploader باسم (talk) 17:38, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Alaa :)..! 18:48, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
Löschantrag aus persönlichen Gründen Bybbisch94 (talk) 17:17, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Löschantrag zugestimmt, Bild unvorteilhaft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mühlstein11 (talk • contribs) 09:03, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: still no OTRS confirmation. --JuTa 07:58, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
- reclose. --Minoraxtalk 02:24, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Löschantrag aus persönlichen Gründen Bybbisch94 (talk) 17:18, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Löschantrag zugestimmt, Bild unvorteilhaft. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mühlstein11 (talk • contribs) 11:04, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
- Ich verstehe zwar den Anlass des Löschantrags, der Einwurf "Bild unvorteilhaft" für ein Gebäude ist aber kein Grund. --Magnus (talk) 10:09, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: still no OTRS confirmation. --JuTa 07:59, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
- reclose. --Minoraxtalk 02:24, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Cape Verde A1Cafel (talk) 03:35, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 16:31, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Cape Verde A1Cafel (talk) 03:35, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 16:33, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
COM:PACKAGING VLu (talk) 07:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 16:34, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
The depicted remarkable building is likely still in copyright by its architect (70 years pma). Regrettably, Azerbaijan has no freedom-of-panorama exception. So, we need a permission by the architect or the image needs to be deleted. -- Túrelio (talk) 13:25, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Same problem with:
- File:Baku 15 07 53 484000.jpeg
- File:Baku 15 07 48 160000.jpeg
- File:Baku 15 08 02 086000.jpeg
- File:Baku 15 08 14 887000.jpeg
- File:Baku 15 08 26 250000.jpeg
- File:Baku 15 08 35 270000.jpeg
- File:Baku 15 06 57 458000.jpeg
- File:Baku 15 06 49 255000.jpeg - @Túrelio: Building cropped. Should be Keep now. --A1Cafel (talk) 15:00, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
- File:Baku 15 06 41 386000.jpeg - @Túrelio: Building cropped. Should be Keep now. --A1Cafel (talk) 15:00, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
- File:Baku 15 07 15 693000.jpeg - the infringing left halb of this image might be cropped away. @Túrelio: Building cropped. Should be Keep now. --A1Cafel (talk) 15:00, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
- File:Baku 15 06 22 130000.jpeg - the infringing left halb of this image might be cropped away. @Túrelio: Building cropped. Should be Keep now. --A1Cafel (talk) 15:00, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
- File:Baku 15 06 14 216000.jpeg - might go per de minimis Keep as de minimis. --A1Cafel (talk) 15:00, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
- File:Baku 15 06 07 065000.jpeg - might go per de minimis Keep as de minimis. --A1Cafel (talk) 15:00, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete the rest per COM:FOP Azerbaijan--A1Cafel (talk) 04:40, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination + hid pre-crop versions. Ruthven (msg) 20:41, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
COM:DW of copyrighted statues; likely not permanently installed, whereby not covered from FoP exception. -- Túrelio (talk) 08:42, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Delete This photo was taken in Osaka, Japan. No FoP in Japan for statues. --Yuraily Lic (talk) 21:28, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:07, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
There's no freedom of panorama in the Philippines. Photos of this sculpture infringe the moral rights of its creators. 120.29.106.189 05:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete unfortunately. According to iskomunidad.upd.edu.ph, this is a work of Jaime Ang in 1995. Undelete when FOP is implemented in the Philippines, if ever this falls in the scope of future Philippine FOP. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:46, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:43, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
There's no freedom of panoramas in the Philippines. The statue is a registered property of the University of the Philippines since 2004, and reproductions of this without prior permission from the management violates UP's trademark rights. Notwithstanding the trademark, it's celebrated artist Guillermo Tolentino died in 1976. 120.29.106.189 05:16, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Note: registration is for trademark only (and trademarks are not part of the copyright), hence irrelevant. However, Delete: see Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Guillermo Tolentino — the sculptor died in 1976 so this won't be in public domain until 2027 (50+1 years). Better still, FOP should be introduced in our country as soon as possible. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:24, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 07:20, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
No FoP in Ukraine - modern monuments, plaques, memorials, sculptures, statues, etc
- File:Myrolyubivka (Pishchanskyi Raion) 15.JPG
- File:Myrolyubivka (Pishchanskyi Raion) 16.JPG
- File:Stavky (Pishchanskyi Raion) 22.JPG
- File:Stavky (Pishchanskyi Raion) 09.JPG
- File:Stavky (Pishchanskyi Raion) 08.JPG
- File:Yavorivka (Pishchanskyi Raion) 11.JPG
- File:Yavorivka (Pishchanskyi Raion) 06.JPG
- File:Yavorivka (Pishchanskyi Raion) 07.JPG
- File:Yavorivka (Pishchanskyi Raion) 05.JPG
- File:Studena 22.JPG
- File:Yulia Riabchynska tomb 1.JPG
- File:Yulia Riabchynska tomb 2.JPG
- File:Pishchanka 21.JPG
- File:Pishchanka 16.JPG
- File:Pishchanka 12.JPG
- File:Pishchanka memorial complex 05.JPG
- File:Honorivka (Pishchanskyi Raion) 06.JPG
- File:Chornomyn 29.JPG
- File:Ivanky 23.jpg
- File:Ivanky 20.jpg
- File:Ivanky 22.jpg
- File:Ivanky 21.jpg
- File:Chornomyn 14.JPG
- File:Chornomyn 13.JPG
- File:Dzharylgach monument 4.jpg
- File:Dzharylgach monument 1.jpg
- File:Aleksandr Shabalin ship 1.JPG
- File:Aleksandr Shabalin ship 2.JPG
- File:Rudnytske (Pishchanskyi Raion) 08.JPG
- File:Rudnytske (Pishchanskyi Raion) 07.JPG
- File:Rudnytske (Pishchanskyi Raion) 06.JPG
- File:Rudnytske (Pishchanskyi Raion) 05.JPG
- File:Horodysche (Pishchanskyi Raion) 29.JPG
- File:Ivanky 15.jpg
- File:Ivanky 14.jpg
- File:Ivanky 13.jpg
- File:Ivanky 12.jpg
- File:Popivka (Lypovets Raion) 13.jpg
- File:Popivka (Lypovets Raion) 12.jpg
- File:Bondarivka (Korosten Raion) 08.JPG
- File:Ivan Chernyahovskiy monument in Vapnyarka 1.jpg
- File:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 8.jpg
- File:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 7.jpg
- File:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 6.jpg
- File:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 5.jpg
- File:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 4.jpg
- File:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 2.jpg
- File:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 3.jpg
- File:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 1.jpg
- File:Krasyatychi Memorial Museum 05.jpg
- File:Taras Shevchenko monument in Tovshchiv 2.jpg
- File:Krayivschyna church 06.JPG
- File:Stavysche 11.JPG
- File:Lisivschyna 09.JPG
- File:Lisivschyna 10.JPG
File:Tiraspol 16.jpgFile:Tiraspol 15.jpgFile:Tiraspol 17.jpg- File:Povenets 01.JPG
- File:Povenets 02.JPG
- File:Kirov monument Medvezhyegorsk 1.JPG
- File:Kirov monument Medvezhyegorsk 2.JPG
- File:Medvezhyegorsk 12.JPG
- File:Medvezhyegorsk 11.JPG
- File:Ivasyuk tomb.jpg
- File:Naberezhnaya v Petrozavodske 30.JPG
- File:Naberezhnaya v Petrozavodske 31.JPG
- File:Naberezhnaya v Petrozavodske 26.JPG
- File:Naberezhnaya v Petrozavodske 27.JPG
- File:Naberezhnaya v Petrozavodske 05.JPG
- File:Petrozavodsk 68.JPG
- File:Meeting with Ukrainians in Karelia 59.JPG
- File:Myhailyn (Koziatynskyi) 9.jpg
- File:Myhailyn (Koziatynskyi) 6.jpg
- File:Petrozavodsk 41.JPG
- File:Levashovo Memorial Cemetery 21.JPG
- File:Levashovo Memorial Cemetery 22.JPG
- File:Schors memorial in Vinnytsia.jpg
- File:Kosa Chushka 5.jpg
- File:Kosa Chushka 4.jpg
- File:Dmytrashkivka 19.jpg
- File:Dmytrashkivka 16.jpg
- File:Dmytrashkivka 17.jpg
- File:Dmytrashkivka 03.jpg
- File:Rudnytsya 03.jpg
- File:Rudnytsya 01.jpg
- File:Zalissya (Chernobyl Exclusion Zone) 22.jpg
- File:Korogod 26.jpg
- File:Korogod 25.jpg
- File:ChNPP 19.jpg
- File:Kopachi 04.jpg
- File:Florianivka 11.jpg
- File:Florianivka 12.jpg
- File:Florianivka 10.jpg
- File:Florianivka 04.jpg
- File:Florianivka 03.jpg
- File:Mykolayivka (Koziatynskyi) 16.jpg
- File:Mykolayivka (Koziatynskyi) 14.jpg
- File:Mykolayivka (Koziatynskyi) 12.jpg
- File:Mykolayivka (Koziatynskyi) 09.jpg
- File:Mykolayivka (Koziatynskyi) 11.jpg
- File:Mykolayivka (Koziatynskyi) 10.jpg
- File:Lozivka (Koziatynskyi) 12.jpg
- File:Lozivka (Koziatynskyi) 11.jpg
- File:Majka Tereza memorial house 10.jpg
- File:Ovruch 25.jpg
- File:Ovruch 01.jpg
- File:Druzhne (Kalynivskyi) 6.jpg
- File:Nova Greblya 28.jpg
- File:Narodychi 59.jpg
- File:Narodychi 53.jpg
- File:Narodychi 51.jpg
- File:Narodychi 49.jpg
- File:Narodychi 14.jpg
- File:Verbivka (Lypovetskyi) 25.jpg
- File:Verbivka (Lypovetskyi) 17.jpg
- File:Bila (Lypovetskyi) 04.jpg
- File:Turbiv hospital12.jpg
- File:Kozyntsi (Lypovetskyi) 23.jpg
- File:Kozyntsi (Lypovetskyi) 10.jpg
- File:Kozyntsi (Lypovetskyi) 08.jpg
- File:Kozyntsi (Lypovetskyi) 07.jpg
- File:Sverdlivka 08.jpg
- File:Sverdlivka 07.jpg
- File:Syvakivtsi 23.jpg
- File:Syvakivtsi 07.jpg
- File:Syvakivtsi 08.jpg
- File:Syvakivtsi 06.jpg
- File:Syvakivtsi 05.jpg
- File:Syvakivtsi 03.jpg
- File:Syvakivtsi 01.jpg
- File:Napadivka 30.jpg
- File:Lypovets 12.jpg
- File:Kirovka 09.jpg
- File:Pol'ova Lysiyivka 16.jpg
- File:Pol'ova Lysiyivka 17.jpg
- File:Pol'ova Lysiyivka 18.jpg
- File:Petropavlivska Borshchagivka 02.jpg
- File:Dmytrashkivka 02.jpg
- File:Chortkiv45.jpg
- File:Chortkiv47.JPG
- File:Pryborivka9.jpg
- File:Chortkiv31.jpg
- File:Chortkiv28.jpg
- File:Chortkiv08.jpg
- File:Chortkiv06.JPG
- File:Turbiv10.JPG
- File:Schorsivka26.jpg
- File:Schorsivka9.jpg
- File:Mezhyrichka12.jpg
- File:WikiKorosten2.jpg
- File:WikiKorosten3.jpg
INeverCry 00:24, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- A horrible mess where nothing can actually be found. I don't know if anyone is really able to check all these 152 images, but on the first sight I have found at least one Russian (File:Meeting with Ukrainians in Karelia 59.JPG), one Moldovan (File:Tiraspol 16.jpg) and one Macedonian photo (File:Majka Tereza memorial house 10.jpg), possibly there are more as user seems to be travelling quite a lot. I have no idea how one can discuss a mix of so different images (as objects are even mixed across countries, with obviously different copyright laws in each of them), and it would be very unfortunate if they will be deleted just because someone nominated them without any adequate review. In my view, the only solution is to speedy close this discussion and nominate on a case by case basis, perhaps per sculpture or memorial depicted, in order to allow a reasonable review. 152 images from at least 4 countries is way too much for a single nomination — NickK (talk) 01:37, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- Photos with Karelia, Petrozavodsk, Medvezhyegorsk, Povenets in names are from Russia, and Tiraspol from Moldova (Transnistria).--Anatoliy (talk) 01:42, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- The list does not seem to be exhaustive. File:Aleksandr Shabalin ship 2.JPG is a stand about a Russian navy officer, and I have serious doubts such stand could have existed in Ukraine or any other country. Most likely there are more, but I can't check all 150 images as it's beyond human capacities and requires a bot or something simillar — NickK (talk) 01:48, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- I see no difference between Russia and Ukraine concerning FoP in this case. Unless one can point works of architecture, of urban development, and of garden and landscape design among those from Russia. However, those from Moldova seem to be suitable for {{FoP-Moldova}}, so I agree to remove them from this DR. Ankry (talk) 05:26, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- File:Petrozavodsk 68.JPG is a work of architecture. Probably there are others.
- Another problem is that some of these sculptures might have been installed as early as in 1920s, but does anyone can really imagine that a human is able to check these 150 images that are presumably not covered by FOP, with no additional information (construction date, author) provided? I can consider this nomination as a certain I'll nominate everything that seems suspicious, anyway no one will check, so they will delete everything — NickK (talk) 12:02, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- Photos with Karelia, Petrozavodsk, Medvezhyegorsk, Povenets in names are from Russia, and Tiraspol from Moldova (Transnistria).--Anatoliy (talk) 01:42, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- Something has to be done with this nomination anyway. Looking through monument lists I have spotted File:Druzhne (Kalynivskyi) 6.jpg. Although it had no template (it was removed when this nomination was closed, which was later reverted by nominator), it was in fact a part of this nomination. However, this monument is {{PD-Ukraine}} as it was erected in 1950 (thus before 1951) by Kyiv Art Fund (Київський художній фонд, a special institution in charge of mass production of monuments for the whole region). As institutions do not have a date of death (although anyway it does not exist anymore) and such monuments have no individual author (even if they did they would have transfered it to Kyiv Art Fund as their employer), thus judging on publishing date of 1950 this monument is {{PD-Ukraine}}
- UPD: same for File:Kozyntsi (Lypovetskyi) 08.jpg, also installed in 1950 by the same art fund, same for File:Myrolyubivka (Pishchanskyi Raion) 16.JPG (installed in 1946 by the same art fund), probably others are in the same situation — NickK (talk) 14:09, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- Please note that this does not mean that I have checked all these files: I just looked through the lists and spotted this one. This shows that nominator checked neither locations (how one can mix Macedonia with Ukraine after reading descriptions) nor dates and authors (as at least one monument is in PD due to its age) — NickK (talk) 12:45, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- I checked only the first third of the files (for more now have no time). Selected some of them:
- file:Krayivschyna church 06.JPG
- file:Krasyatychi Memorial Museum 05.jpg
- file:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 8.jpg
- file:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 3.jpg
- file:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 2.jpg
- file:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 4.jpg
- file:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 5.jpg
- file:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 5.jpg
- file:Pogrebysche Heroes Memorial 7.jpg
- file:Aleksandr_Shabalin_ship_2.JPG
- file:Aleksandr Shabalin ship 1.JPG
- file:Pishchanka 16.JPG
- A bit strange that you are nominating these files as a FOP violation. Ukrainian law prohibits publication of photos of copyrighted three-dimensional works. Here we have photos of works, three-dimensional component of which is near the end to zero or trivial. For example microrelief of letters engraved on granite boards, or trivial forms of boards. I checked only the first third of the files. --(Aeou) 22:38, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Split the non-FoP image liste to smaller parts before re-DR as suggested in https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&oldid=136653869#User:Ahonc Ankry (talk) 11:39, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Derivatives of non-free modern statues, paintings, photos, posters, no permissions provided, no FoP in Ukraine.
- File:Artem monument (Sep 2020).jpg
- File:WWII memorial complex in Kal'nyk 5.jpg
- File:WWII memorial complex in Kal'nyk 1.jpg
- File:Monument of Yaroslav Ivashkevych in Kal'nyk.jpg
- File:Fedir Khomenko Monument in Illintsi.jpg
- File:Memorial signs in Haisyn 2.jpg
- File:School in Novofastiv 2.jpg
- File:School in Novofastiv 3.jpg
- File:Motria Plahotnyk Monument in Illintsi.jpg
- File:Inside Mykola Pymonenko museum in Malyutyanka.jpg
- File:Mariia Kotsiuruba Monument in Illintsi.jpg
- File:Crater No 6 in Illintsi raion 3.jpg
- File:Crater No 6 in Illintsi raion 2.jpg
- File:Пам’ятник воїнам, загиблим 1944 року на Ковалівсько-Андріївському плацдармі.jpg
- File:Victory Day in Velyka Novosilka, 2020 - 3.jpg
- File:Victory Day in Kryzhopil, 2020 - 4.jpg
- File:Victory Day in Sharhorod, 2020 - 8.png
- File:Victory Day in Sharhorod, 2020 - 5.png
- File:Victory Day in Turbiv 2020.jpg
- File:Shemsi Ahmeti monument in Kosovska Mitrovica.jpg
- File:WWII memorial in Subotivka 6.jpg
- File:WWII memorial in Sadkivtsi (near school) 1.jpg
- File:Mohyliv-Podilskyi city park 06.jpg
- File:Artwinery (Aug 2019) 09.jpg
- File:Artwinery (Aug 2019) 02.jpg
- File:Holodomor Remembrance Day 2019 in Kyiv 02.jpg
- File:Abandoned old Belgian building in Lysychansk (Feb 2018) 2.jpg
- File:WWII memorial in Svyatohirsk (Aug 2019).jpg
- File:Taras Shevchenko monument in Kodnia (Apr 2019) 1.jpg
- File:Mass grave of 7 Soviet soldiers in Kleban (Sep 2019) 1.jpg
- File:Artem monument in Svyatohirsk (Aug 2019) 6.jpg
- File:Artem monument in Svyatohirsk (Aug 2019) 4.jpg
- File:Artem monument in Svyatohirsk (Aug 2019) 2.jpg
- File:Artem monument in Svyatohirsk (Aug 2019) 3.jpg
- File:Pavlo Trunov memorial board.jpg
- File:Gagarin park in Zhytomyr (Apr 2019) 1.jpg
- File:Monument near Soda factory in Lysychansk.jpg
- File:Taras Shevchenko monument in Starobilsk.jpg
- File:Taras Shevchenko monument in Kaniv (May 2018) 4.jpg
- File:Taras Shevchenko monument in Kaniv (May 2018) 2.jpg
- File:Bilyashivskyi House 1.jpg
- File:Lysychansk Local History Museum 09.jpg
- File:Lysychansk Local History Museum 06.jpg
- File:Lysychansk Local History Museum 07.jpg
- File:Lysychansk Local History Museum 05.jpg
- File:WWII monument in Andriyivka 7.jpg
- File:WWII memorial complex in Kleban' 21.jpg
- File:WWII memorial complex in Kleban' 20.jpg
- File:WWII memorial complex in Kleban' 12.jpg
- File:Renewed monument in Turbiv park 2.jpg
- File:Renewed monument in Turbiv park 1.jpg
- File:Renewed monument in Turbiv park 3.jpg
- File:Vashchenko gallery 8.jpg
- File:Vashchenko gallery 7.jpg
- File:Vashchenko gallery 9.jpg
- File:Vashchenko gallery 4.jpg
- File:Vashchenko gallery 6.jpg
- File:Vashchenko gallery 5.jpg
- File:Vashchenko gallery 2.jpg
- File:Vashchenko gallery 1.jpg
- File:Vashchenko gallery 3.jpg
VLu (talk) 10:35, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 03:25, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Derivatives of non-free modern statues, paintings, photos, posters, no permissions provided, no FoP in Ukraine UPD:and in Russia for sculpture.
- File:WWII monument in Soledar.jpg
- File:Kosa Chushka 5.jpg
- File:Kosa Chushka 4.jpg
- File:Dmytrashkivka 16.jpg
- File:Dmytrashkivkamuseum30.jpg
- File:Dmytrashkivkamuseum29.jpg
- File:Bolgan border 2.jpg
- File:Bolgan border 3.jpg
- File:Rudnytsya 03.jpg
- File:Zalissya (Chernobyl Exclusion Zone) 22.jpg
- File:KyivBotsad 02.jpg
- File:Goverla 02.jpg
- File:Ovruch 25.jpg
- File:Narodychi 59.jpg
- File:Narodychi 53.jpg
- File:Narodychi 42.jpg
- File:Narodychi 43.jpg
- File:Narodychi 40.jpg
- File:Narodychi 39.jpg
- File:Narodychi 41.jpg
- File:Narodychi 37.jpg
- File:Malyn 07.jpg
- File:Verbivka (Lypovetskyi) 25.jpg
- File:Verbivka (Lypovetskyi) 17.jpg
- File:Turbiv hospital12.jpg
- File:Kozyntsi (Lypovetskyi) 23.jpg
- File:Kozyntsi (Lypovetskyi) 08.jpg
- File:Syvakivtsi 07.jpg
- File:Syvakivtsi 08.jpg
- File:Syvakivtsi 06.jpg
- File:Pryborivka9.jpg
- File:Turbiv10.JPG
- File:Schorsivka26.jpg
- File:Schorsivka9.jpg
- File:UshomyrPark3.jpg
- File:Mezhyrichka12.jpg
- File:Mezhyrichka7.jpg
- File:WikiKorosten2.jpg
- File:WikiKorosten3.jpg
VLu (talk) 07:30, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- @VLu: , please stop fight against my photoworks. Many of your deletion nominations have mistakes, because they are not from Ukraine as you write. Be attentive. --Visem (talk) 08:25, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
For everybody who wants to delete my works please mention that many of this and previous nominations have mistakes. For example in previous nomination were pictures from Belarus. Here there are picures from Russia (for example Kosa Chushka), but written by nominator that it is Ukraine. Also there are some road signs, sculptures in the wall, governmenal works which are under free license. Please be attentive. Also some of monuments are already destroyed. --Visem (talk) 07:18, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- Visem, so what? Such artworks are non-free in Russia and Belarus as well. VLu (talk) 08:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hello @VLu: , I'm afraid that your questions are combined semi-automatically within this COM:VPC discussion. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:29, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
- Liuxinyu970226, please explain what my questions do you mean and what you find in common between the PD-Gov and the FoP issues. --VLu (talk) 16:57, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
- @VLu and Visem: Because, that said, some users think that tags within Category:PD-Gov_license_tags may also be URAA-affected, and hence copyrightable in the United States. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:02, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- Liuxinyu970226, please explain what my questions do you mean and what you find in common between the PD-Gov and the FoP issues. --VLu (talk) 16:57, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
- Hello @VLu: , I'm afraid that your questions are combined semi-automatically within this COM:VPC discussion. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:29, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per en:WP:TRAINWRECK. Many different cases. Please renominate as separate DRs. --Anatoliy (talk) 10:51, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 09:04, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Despite the uploader's long and productive tenure at Commons, I find it highly unlikely they are the copyright holder of this image. This image was published elsewhere on the internet prior to this 2015 upload, for example this 2014 Wales Online article or a 2013 Sky News report contain it. A much larger (larger than any version I can find on the internet, in the full version it can be seen he is holding a tambourine and a guitar and you see most of the guitar not just the fretboard) black and white version of the image appeared in the 2000 book Charles Bronson (ISBN 1-857832-3931, and despite the name of the image, the subject is better known as Charles Bronson, although that isn't his real name and he has used a variety of names including Charles Salvador) where the copyright page states "Pictures reproduced by kind permission of James Nicholson". James Nicholson was a crime reporter who was close to Charles Bronson, and is obviously a far more likely candidate to be the copyright holder (as indeed the 2000 book suggests) of a photo taken inside an English prison than a Wikipedian from Italy. FDW777 (talk) 17:20, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 09:05, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Cropped version of a file nominated for deletion. MarioBayo (talk) 07:10, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Billinghurst at 12:20, 1 April 2021 UTC: CSD G7 (author or uploader request deletion) --Krdbot 00:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
This photo is downloaded from there (VR_IC_Kuvaaja_Alma_2.jpg). Those photos aren't allowed to use commercially. Puppe100 (talk) 05:36, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. The gallery page has a confusing "full rights" mention, but the main page says (in Finnish) that the images are for "journalistic purposes" and commercial use is prohibited. (Also the image is falsely marked as "own work" which is common for crosswiki uploads.) -kyykaarme (talk) 16:21, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:01, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
File:Asambleísta Cesar Montufar interviene sobre la Ley de Educación Superior (4116201260) (cropped).jpg
[edit]Duplicado Baron1993 (talk) 06:26, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Duplicate of what? --Túrelio (talk) 07:54, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; cropped from another file, which is perfectly acceptable, otherwise doesn't seem to be a duplicate (DR template was already removed from the file description earlier by another user). --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:04, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Not enough evidence of own work; user with history of copyvio Frodar (talk) 18:48, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Keep, insufficient rationale for deletion. EXIF metadata indicates a Xiaomi Redmi 5A phone.[7] The user's history is insufficient reason to delete: they have not been blocked so we should not automatically reject their uploads. Verbcatcher (talk) 23:43, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per Verbcatcher; full resolution file with Exif data - in this case, own work seems plausible enough. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:07, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Low resolution; same name as another file. MarioBayo (talk) 07:09, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Seems that this is the new image: File:New Communist Party of Aotearoa Logo, 2020.png (both uploaded by the same user). --XXN, 18:10, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Deletion requests/File:New Communist Party of Aotearoa Logo, 2020.png. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 13:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
COM:DW of a copyrighted character. [8] Yuraily Lic (talk) 07:58, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 07:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 07:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Les logos restent la propriété de l'institution, la licence CC ne s'accorde pas avec ce droit réservé, le logo a été importé directement sur Wikipédia fr Pierrette13 (talk) 10:45, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 07:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
May be above COM:TOO China? 沈澄心✉ 13:38, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion: simple shape. Ruthven (msg) 07:58, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Ruthven: China's threshold of originality is very low. See the examples in COM:TOO China including the LY company logo, Gang Heng logo, and K2 Sports logo, they are all relatively simple shapes but are subject to copyright protection according to court cases. This image in question is comparable to these protected examples.
The previous DR failed to consider the specific examples of judicial precedents in COM:TOO China, including the LY company logo, Gang Heng logo, and K2 Sports logo, they are all seemingly simple shapes but are subject to copyright protection according to court cases. This image in question is comparable to these protected examples. Wcam (talk) 13:11, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Ruthven: 5W1H do you consider Wcam's contest against your keep decision? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:49, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: Still looks too simple to be copyrighted. What about if someone uploads a very similar shape on Commons without associating it to PRDIR company? Would it be kept or deleted? Then, this file could be used on Wikipedia exactly like this one. --Ruthven (msg) 06:30, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
- Hence Keep, I would say that K2 example isn't really work here. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:10, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- Keep per above. —Tim Wu (talk) 00:36, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
- Ruthven's argument does not hold water as it essentially substitutes COM:TOO with Ruthven's own opinion on whether a logo looks too simple. The problem is, the uploader did indicate that this work is associated to PRDIR company created in China, and this image exceeds COM:TOO China making it not free in the source country, therefore keeping this file is against COM:L. If another uploader (from the US, for example) comes up with a similar design independently and uploads it here, then there wouldn't be a problem, but it is not the case here. --Wcam (talk) 17:19, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 16:51, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
and File:Campagne2015-MarcAntoineMesser (cropped).jpg.
Commons:Freedom of panorama in Switzerland doesn't cover temporary displays. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:16, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 07:59, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
I misunderstood the copyright restrictions. It is free under Swedish law, but not under American. Hence, the file should be deleted. //Tanzania (talk) 16:59, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 08:00, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Fichier lié à un article supprimé ou inexistant, supprimé dans Wikipédia en français Manchesterunited1234 (talk) 20:15, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 08:00, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Small-sized (icon size) unused text logos of unclear notability.
XXN, 19:25, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --shizhao (talk) 13:33, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Images from Individual State Supreme Court are copyrighted A1Cafel (talk) 03:31, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Elly (talk) 22:16, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Subject picture in the photo en:Srila Bhaktivedanta Narayana Gosvami Maharaja died on December 29, 2010, which means there's no way the photo could've been taken on September 27, 2020, as claimed in the file's description. Moreover, the file's description also states the photo is from the late 1990s. So, unless the uploader can verify that the photo is there "own work" (per COM:L) as explained in COM:OTRS#Licensing images: when do I contact OTRS?, this file shouldn't be kept per COM:PCP. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:39, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Elly (talk) 22:18, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
This image doesn't show the actual subject, and its licencing is dubious.
This image purports to show ex-British Army officer the late John Waddy. It doesn't physically look like him and the regiment insignia on the collar isn't his either (he joined the Somerset Light Infantry).
Additionally, the licensing is dubious. It appears to have come from https://alchetron.com/John-Waddy-(British-Army-officer), which is itself largely a copy of Wikipedia. There the image has no information. It's questionable it was originally a British government image as it's a portrait and could easily be a personal family photograph. Ranger Steve (talk) 06:58, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Elly (talk) 22:21, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Originally marked by me as a "copyright violation" under the reason:
The website https://nlex.com.ph (in which the http://www.mntc.com/ now redirects to) indicates their content as "ALL RIGHTS RESERVED" - in effect copyrighted and unfree. Wikimedia Commons does not accept "All Rights Reserved" media, only "SOME rights reserved" (freely-licensed, preferrably using Creative Commons) or "NO rights reserved" (public domain). No evidence that NLEX Corporation has licensed their content under Creative Commons or released their content in PD, logos and trademarks inclusive.
This was reverted by Mx. Granger on the grounds of {{PD-textlogo}}. But that's invalid if the owner - NLEX Corporation who operates both NLEX and SCTEX - claims copyright on the logo. The website clearly states that all of their content (logo inclusive) are all rights reserved. One principle of Commons is free reuses of media files including commercial, but the fact that the NLEX Corporation indicates their content as "All Rights Reserved" means that commercial exploits with no permission is not allowed. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Mx. Granger: I know about TOO, but that is overwritten by the licensing of NLEX Corporation over the content of their website, which includes logos. And the Philippines has different copyright concept on logos. If it may be PD in countries like United States, it may be not in the Philippines. In our country it is considered plagiarism (illegal) to copy corporate logos without permission from the copyright holder which is usually the owners themselves. NLEX Corporation is not a government corporation, hence PD-PhilippinesGov doesn't apply. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:28, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Note: I have already uploaded a local file on enwiki as w:File:SCTEX logo.png, using w:Template:PD-ineligible-USonly. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:49, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- @JWilz12345: I think it's ok now to draft a "Threshold of originality" section within COM:Philippines? By this logo, I'm really confused the TOO status in this country. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:34, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
- @JWilz12345, adding a copyright/licensing statement cannot turn the un-copyrightable into copyrighted content. It's just not possible to do that. If it's actually below the threshold of originality, then no amount of claiming it to be copyrighted makes any difference at all.
- I don't know enough the relevant points to figure out whether TOO applies here or not. That's the question that presumably needs to be settled here. Whether the company claims (i.e., perhaps erroneously) that everything on the website is copyrighted by them is not the important point. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:54, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- Note: I have already uploaded a local file on enwiki as w:File:SCTEX logo.png, using w:Template:PD-ineligible-USonly. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:49, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Mx. Granger: I know about TOO, but that is overwritten by the licensing of NLEX Corporation over the content of their website, which includes logos. And the Philippines has different copyright concept on logos. If it may be PD in countries like United States, it may be not in the Philippines. In our country it is considered plagiarism (illegal) to copy corporate logos without permission from the copyright holder which is usually the owners themselves. NLEX Corporation is not a government corporation, hence PD-PhilippinesGov doesn't apply. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:28, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
kept. Although I cannot find information about Philippine TOO on COM:TOO I consider this as a simple text logo with two colored triangles. Several of this type are to be found on Commons, such as File:2015 WWE logo.svg or File:1.VFC Plauen (1903-1945).png. Therefore, I consider this logo below threshold of originality and not copyrightable. Elly (talk) 22:40, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by LifetimeWiki as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: F10 — billinghurst sDrewth 10:56, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. In scope, suitable for Punjabi wedding traditions#Rokka (pre-engagement). ✗plicit 14:20, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Kept: Uploaded in relation to project Wiki loves love 2019 and thus F10 is not a valid reason. And in scope per User:Explicit Elly (talk) 22:49, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
A better version in jpg format has been uploaded Kautilya3 (talk) 15:44, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, upload by the person who requested deletion so per Commons:Courtesy deletions albeit a bit late. Elly (talk) 23:00, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
The info page in the west frisian wiki says its a crop of a free image in commons but I couldn't find that image and as a derivative it must link to the original image so we can check that license and correct the original ownership of the image. Spartaz (talk) 16:27, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Well, have you been able to find this image in any search engine? I could not me too find the free licensed photo mentioned. But I moved it to commons due to license.--Madrox (talk) 20:17, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Madrox what was your rationale for adding the {{Eigenwurk}} tag to this file on West Friesian Wikipedia? By doing this you asserted that the original image was created by Ieneach fan 'e Esk. Ieneach fan 'e Esk did not indicate authorship when the file was added to West Fresian Wikipedia. When you transferred the image to Commons you specified 'author=Ieneach fan 'e Esk'. Are you the same person as Ieneach fan 'e Esk? Verbcatcher (talk) 01:39, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- No, he is not. As I stated on fywiki: I found this image on Commons, but as I recall it was a full length photo, from head to feet, and therefore I found it not very useful for an infobox. So I cropped it. I do not claim in any way to by the author or maker of this image. I therefore removed the eigen wurk tag Madrox added to the image on fywiki. If you guys can't find the original image on Commons anymore, that must mean it was deleted. Therefore you should probably delete this image, also. Ieneach fan 'e Esk (talk) 20:17, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- Madrox what was your rationale for adding the {{Eigenwurk}} tag to this file on West Friesian Wikipedia? By doing this you asserted that the original image was created by Ieneach fan 'e Esk. Ieneach fan 'e Esk did not indicate authorship when the file was added to West Fresian Wikipedia. When you transferred the image to Commons you specified 'author=Ieneach fan 'e Esk'. Are you the same person as Ieneach fan 'e Esk? Verbcatcher (talk) 01:39, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- Well, have you been able to find this image in any search engine? I could not me too find the free licensed photo mentioned. But I moved it to commons due to license.--Madrox (talk) 20:17, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete as having uncertain provenance and authorship, unless Ieneach fan 'e Esk can provide clarification. Verbcatcher (talk) 01:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
- I have deleted the author information from the file. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:12, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. I am not convinced the image has another version on the web in PD/CC-0. Deleted also because of the Precautionary principle Elly (talk) 23:09, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
article (wp) and item (wd) are up for deletion. so, the question then becomes - do we need the image on commons? Quakewoody (talk) 14:36, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi. Please, in what way can I help to keep my contribution? In what sense have I incurred the content being deleted? What did I do wrong or is it considered spam? Thanks for your help.--Radialactica (talk) 16:22, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Wikidata item still exists. Elly (talk) 19:32, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Probably above the threshold of originality even in the U.S. Not used anywhere. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:49, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Elly (talk) 19:36, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
dubious claim of free license (metadata etc) Horus (talk) 14:11, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
I am the owner of the real photo, I scanned it by myself. But it free for others to use. Should I change it to public domain?Legendarymos (talk) 6:37, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Legendarymos: The copyright holder is the original photographer, not the owner of the actual photo. However, if the photographer is dead for more than 50 years, it could be released in public domain. --Horus (talk) 10:54, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Horus: I have changed it to PD-70. One more information, he was my grandmother's father and this photo is from family album.
- You also need to correct the info. Who is the original photographer? It's definitely not you. Once changed, I will retract the deletion request. --Horus (talk) 06:12, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Horus: I don't know who is the photographer (and I believe no living one knows) and what should I indicate? May be the portrait was taken at a photo service shop. If the portrait was taken by the service shop so the right should be belongs to the person in the portrait, right?
- You can state "unknown." However, you will need to verify the license because PD-old applies to material which is more than 50 years old since its creation or since its author died. --Horus (talk) 13:02, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Horus: Changed to "Unknown".
- @Legendarymos: , what is the (estimated) date of this photo? I hope you are still around to answer this question. Elly (talk) 22:54, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: the uploader isn't active since October 2020... deleting due to lack of information required. --rubin16 (talk) 08:25, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Hoax roundels
[edit]- File:Armenian Air Force roundel.svg ( Keep depicted in Military Aircraft Insignia of the World by John Cochrane and Stuart Elliott (C & E) as a suggested roundel in place of the red star - Josh)
- File:Barbade.svg (wrong according to C & E, they depict Barbasos using the national flag on the fin - Josh) DELETE it's a non-existent roundel - FOX 52 (talk) 02:34, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- File:Belizean Air Force Roundel.svg (as with Barbados, they are shown by C & E as using the national flag, and this image is missing the seal included on the flag. -Josh)
- File:Bhutan roundel.png (Shown on www.drareg.nl but without photographic support, so most likely either came from us or Roundels Of The World)DELETE it's a non-existent roundel - FOX 52 (talk) 02:34, 5 October 2020 (UTC) ; Keep per documented evidence below by Xufanc. Josh (talk) 23:34, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- File:Roundel of Bhutan.svg (ditto)DELETE it's a non-existent roundel - FOX 52 (talk) 02:34, 5 October 2020 (UTC); Keep & fix, as it is not non-existant, just needs a tweak to the disc size per Xufanc below. Josh (talk) 23:34, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- File:Roundel of the Congolese Air Force-variant.svg (again, a roundelized version of the flag, but C & E simply shows a rectangular flag as the fin insignia. -Josh)
- File:Roundel of the Georgian Air Force - former.svg ( Keep C & E depicts this roundel as per the image. They note that the 1920 flag-derived markings were considered upon independence. -Josh)
- File:Georgie.Ancien.svg (similar to above but colors seem off and I didn't find support for the rectangular version at all, the one above is sufficient -Josh) (I presume the rectangle is meant to represent the flag being used as a fin flash, as Groteddy has included roundels and fin flashes together in other files -Fry)
- File:Kazakhstan. ancienne identification des aéronefs.svg ( Keep C & E depicts this roundel as one suggested to replace the red star -Josh)
- File:Maurice (île) identification des aéronefs.svg (C & E notes that both circular and horizontally-split roundels may have been used, but provides no depiction of the latter. -Josh)
- File:Roundel of Moldovan Air Force (alternate).svg (C & E notes unconfirmed reports of a segmented roundel, but has no depiction -Josh)
- File:Mongolian Air Force Roundel.svg (C & E notes that a simple red/blue/red roundel has been suggested, but no depiction is provided, so no support for this particular file representing that suggestion accurately -Josh)
- File:Roundel of Mongolia.svg (see previous -Josh)
- File:Roundel of Namibia.svg (ditto)
- File:Namibie identification aéronefs.svg (ditto)
- File:Macedoine ancienne identification.svg
- File:Sao-Tome et Principe cocarde aéronefs.svg (ditto)
- File:Seychelles cocarde aéronefs.svg
- File:Trinite et tobago Cocarde identification aéronefs.svg (ditto) (C & E notes that the national flag is used on the fuselage and red/white/black rudder stripes on the tail. -Josh)
- File:Ouzbekistan identification aéronefs.svg ( Keep C & E depicts this roundel as a considered alternative upon independence. Furthermore, Jane's World Air Forces (1999) depicts this as the actual roundel of Uzbekistan. -Josh)
- File:Viêt Nam variante.svg ( Keep (but note in description missing red boundary, unless a more accurate one is uploaded) C & E depicts North Vietnam using a gold star with red outline c.1964-5, but not this version without the red outline. -Josh)
- File:Roundel of Bosnia and Herzegovina (1992-1998).svg (Former coat of arms is shown on www.drareg.nl on a business jet and the tail of one helicopter, so should be replaced by that file where appropriate) ( Keep C & E depict the marking as per this file, which differs slightly from the coat of arms (no golden fringe) C &E notes that the version without gold fringe was used 1992-onward -Josh)
These roundels lack authoritative sourcing. They either have no source at all, or are souced to the "Roundels of the World" website, a website that no longer appears to work, had not been updated since the early 2000s, and which has been shown to be unreliable. None of these have been confirmed by actual photographic evidence, and are not shown on this website which is reliable and regularly updated. If they are hoaxes, we should not be hosting them and allowing them to be used in an official manner which is misleading. Fry1989 eh? 15:36, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- There are a few different issues going on here. Some represent documented considered alternatives while others have detail errors. However, calling any a hoax would be wrong without evidence of them representing intentional deception, of which I found none. As such, I have added specific notes above to each one that I could find information on. A roundel which represents a documented alternative or contender should be retained, though its description should be updated to label it as such to avoid confusion with the officially adopted version. Some of these should definitely be kept and I have noted those above. As for others which are more questionable, I would recommend probably not deleting, but instead marking them as reported or proposed alternates and noting that they lack a reference as of the moment. We shouldn't delete solely on the basis that we cannot locate a ready photo or source, but instead simply flag them so another user with access to other sources may come along reference them. Also keep in mind that it is not uncommon in newly independent countries, especially with small or poorly organized air forces, to feature a wide variety of national markings on aircraft that never make it to the official documents. Thus my general input is to Keep all, with notes added to each relevant to their specifics. Josh (talk) 02:00, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- No I have to agree with Fry on most to these files, they appear to be someones idea of an art project of something. - I've done extensive search(s) on the net for any evidence of their existence with no luck. - FOX 52 (talk) 02:40, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- Regardless of the outcome of this DR, I do believe we should work on ceasing unsourced roundels being used inappropriately, by adding disputed/no source templates to the infoboxes and also removing them from articles where they are currently being used. There are a few others I chose not to include in this DR at this time because I consider them probable. Fry1989 eh? 22:38, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- The File:Bhutan roundel.png appears in Jane's Aircraft Recognition Guide Fifth Edition. ISBN 978-0-06-134619-4 (in the US) Page 522 fifth row from top. Xufanc (talk) 16:07, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- The white disk of File:Roundel of Bhutan.svg is too large. Xufanc (talk) 16:12, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Fry1989: I agree with that sentiment completely. That is why I think each roundel file, including those that are completely official and undisputed, should contain detailed descriptions which include details of both de jure and de facto relevance. Users of images are ultimately responsible for ensuring that the images are used responsibly but we should offer the best assistance possible on the Commons side. I do not believe that the appropriate method is to police usage by deleting files to prevent inappropriate use of the files. It is not in the scope of Commons to determine usage, but merely to facilitate it. Josh (talk) 22:55, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
- The desire wasn't to "police", per se, but rather to avoid Commons/Wikimedia Projects furthering inaccurate information. We do host many fictional flags and I don't have any issue with that, because they're clearly labelled as fictional. With these roundels, the situation is more muddy. Fry1989 eh? 16:49, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
- The File:Bhutan roundel.png appears in Jane's Aircraft Recognition Guide Fifth Edition. ISBN 978-0-06-134619-4 (in the US) Page 522 fifth row from top. Xufanc (talk) 16:07, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
- Regardless of the outcome of this DR, I do believe we should work on ceasing unsourced roundels being used inappropriately, by adding disputed/no source templates to the infoboxes and also removing them from articles where they are currently being used. There are a few others I chose not to include in this DR at this time because I consider them probable. Fry1989 eh? 22:38, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: on Commons we usually delete images with copyright issues, vandalism or something out of scope. Inaccuracies don't lead to deletion here by themselves when images are used in Wikimedia projects. Here I see that they are used or they were used for later SVG versions that are used. So, inaccuracies are to be solved in Wikimedia projects, not here. I don't see any problem with copyright, significant part of them would be ineligible for triviality anyway. --rubin16 (talk) 08:32, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
dubious claim of free license Horus (talk) 16:24, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
I am the owner of the real item (card), I scanned it by myself. But it free for other to use. Should I change it to public domain? Legendarymos (talk) 6:36, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Legendarymos: The card may be the copyright of the party, or if it is older than 50 years, then it should be released as public domain. --Horus (talk) 10:53, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Horus: I have changed it to PD-70. One more information, he was my grandmother's father and this photo is from family album.
- File info need correction before retraction of deletion request. --Horus (talk) 06:13, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Horus: Which part of the file info is needed change? I change to PD-70 already. If the photographer is required then what should be indicated for the member card from the politic party that dissolved 63 years ago.
- Author: Legendarymos needs changing. You only scan the work, not author it. Maybe it is the party, the publisher of the card, or the issuer of the card; it's your responsibility to find out. --Horus (talk) 13:04, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Horus: Changed to "Unknown".
Deleted: per nomination. --rubin16 (talk) 08:26, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
ru:Википедия:К посредничеству/Башкиро-татарский вопрос/Иные или сочетанные вопросы/Архив/2020/10#Флаг Канского ханства Белорецкий (talk) 17:40, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Keep This is a (badly) vectorized version of a raster image I created for FotW (exactly!) 18 years ago using (the contemporary Russian translation of) a 18th cent. Dutch flag chart as clipart source. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:18, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment 3 deadlinks... --Infovarius (talk) 23:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Infovarius: None of those three links are dead, I just checked. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:21, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin: , These images are probably fantasies of flags used in Tartary, as the empire of the Great Khan was called then.
- @La loi et la justice: Объясните, что выреза быть не должно. Белорецкий (talk) 21:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
- Вы о чём? Даже если это не флаг, то зачем его удалять? -- La loi et la justice (talk) 05:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- Об этом * Белорецкий, этот флаг вымышленный. Его можно удалить согласно решению посредничества. — Ryanag 05:49, 4 октября 2020 (UTC) Белорецкий (talk) 13:26, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Белорецкий: Being a fantasy (especially a historical one) is not a reason to delete a flag image from Wikimedia Commons. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 10:52, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
lllllllllllllll.png){kind=link}
_3.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_Sunrise_(30854495933).jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
lllllllllllllll.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
lllllllllllllll.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
lllllllllllllll.png){kind=link}
lllllllllllllll.png){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
_(lanD0004).jpg){kind=link}
_Town_hall_illuminations_(3).JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_town_hall_Illuminations_december_2012_(1).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}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:PM_Mitsotakis_visits_Karditsa_Ianos.png&diff=476502001&oldid=474335670){kind=link}
_3.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_3.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_2.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}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_Sunrise_(30854495933).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Sunrise_(30854495933).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_Sunrise_(30854495933).jpg){kind=link}
_Sunrise_(30854495933).jpg){kind=link}
_15.JPG){kind=link}
_16.JPG){kind=link}
_22.JPG){kind=link}
_09.JPG){kind=link}
_08.JPG){kind=link}
_11.JPG){kind=link}
_06.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_07.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_05.JPG){kind=link}
_06.JPG){kind=link}
_08.JPG){kind=link}
_07.JPG){kind=link}
_06.JPG){kind=link}
_05.JPG){kind=link}
_29.JPG){kind=link}
_13.jpg){kind=link}
_12.jpg){kind=link}
_08.JPG){kind=link}
_9.jpg){kind=link}
_6.jpg){kind=link}
_22.jpg){kind=link}
_16.jpg){kind=link}
_14.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_12.jpg){kind=link}
_09.jpg){kind=link}
_11.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_10.jpg){kind=link}
_12.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_11.jpg){kind=link}
_6.jpg){kind=link}
_25.jpg){kind=link}
_17.jpg){kind=link}
_04.jpg){kind=link}
_23.jpg){kind=link}
_10.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_08.jpg){kind=link}
_07.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_09.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_02.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_6.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_4.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_3.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_4.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG&oldid=941226){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_identification_des_a%C3%A9ronefs.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
@Tuválkin: no cutout ВотанБатан (talk) 13:31, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, no cutout along the fly is how most flat reinterpretations of Allard’s original wavy image look like. But it’s debatable, of course, and it has been debated for a couple decades now, at least. Even if it is agreed by all experts that there was no cutout intended by Allard (which needs to be decided upon a significant study of all flags in Allard’s chart), we still need this image — to illustrate how vexillologists throughout the centuries misinterpreted Allard’s depiction of this (possibly wholly ficticious) flag. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 22:03, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
- why invent it??? Neckline ВотанБатан (talk) 14:23, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
- Already replied above. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:18, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Kept: inaccuracies aren't a reason for deletion on Commons, widely used image. --rubin16 (talk) 08:40, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Files of Binali Yıldırım
[edit]- File:Binali Yıldırım TRT ziyareti.jpg
- File:Binali Yıldırım TRT (2016).jpg
- File:TRT live Binali Yıldırım (2016).jpg
- File:TRT Haber 2016.jpg
- File:BinaliYildirimMuhalefet.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
These photos were taken by Prime Ministry of Turkey. In the news of VOA, the copyright owner is stated in this way. The photos taken by the state institutions in Turkey are copyrighted. Therefore, these should be deleted. Uncitoyen (talk) 19:15, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Turkish Radio and Television Corporation (TRT) visited by Binali Yıldırım, published these photos on the same day. [9] Probably, VOA took them from the Prime Ministry and published. In this video here, Anadolu Agency stated that it takes this video from the prime ministry. There is the logo of the Turkey prime ministry on the right of the video. [10] In other words, the photo was served by the prime ministry to press. Because Anadolu Agency wrote in this news that the meeting was closed to the press. Therefore, it is difficult for VOA take itself this photo. Uncitoyen (talk) 20:33, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --rubin16 (talk) 08:42, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Túrelio as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: newspaper content is copyrighted Royalbroil 22:09, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- I had deleted it along with parent file File:Crosley Farm-O-Road - Leaflet.jpg as License laundering. A flickr contributor had uploaded the photograph of the page in a magazine claiming a Creative Commons license. I restored the files after @GeeTeeBee: said "I just checked Copyright rules by subject matter to make sure, and I firmly believe this to fall under the U.S. advertising
OK Exceptions !" (diff]). It's worth a full deletion discussion. I ping @Túrelio: to contribute to the discussion. Royalbroil 22:15, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for swiftly undeleting the image. Now, please don't confuse the copyright on mr. Gjerdingen's photographs, with the copyright on the advertisement captured in this instance. The perceived copyvio obviously regards the subject of the photo. The fact that this whole page is an advertisement is clearly and literally so stated in large print on the bottom of the page, and thanks to mr. Gjerdingen's good quality photo also very clearly legible.
- The ad was for a motor vehicle, built by the now defunct U.S. company Crosley Motors Incorporated, and sold in the U.S. from 1950–1952. But more specifically, the Copyright rules by subject matter/Advertisement demand that an advert is published in a collective work (magazine or newspaper) in the U.S., without a valid copyright notice, before 1978, to fall outside copyright coverage of the collective work it was published in. And indeed it was published, as advertised in the photograph, in the Albany, NY, 'Country Gentleman' publication, in 1951, as evidenced by this Amazon offer for a preserved 1951 Country Gentleman page, with this very advert printed on it. I therefore argue that this image does satisfy the requirements for OK Exceptions of advertisement copyright, as the ad fell into the public domain. --GeeTeeBee (talk) 08:18, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- The ad was for a motor vehicle, built by the now defunct U.S. company Crosley Motors Incorporated, and sold in the U.S. from 1950–1952. But more specifically, the Copyright rules by subject matter/Advertisement demand that an advert is published in a collective work (magazine or newspaper) in the U.S., without a valid copyright notice, before 1978, to fall outside copyright coverage of the collective work it was published in. And indeed it was published, as advertised in the photograph, in the Albany, NY, 'Country Gentleman' publication, in 1951, as evidenced by this Amazon offer for a preserved 1951 Country Gentleman page, with this very advert printed on it. I therefore argue that this image does satisfy the requirements for
kept per Commons:Copyright_rules_by_subject_matter#Advertisement, US-advertisement prior to 1978. The photos might be copyrighted, but I consider these Commons:De minimis as they are small and rather unsharp. Elly (talk) 08:03, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
superceded by File:Emotional_and_Psychological_Impact_of_Interpreting_for_Clients_with_Traumatic_Histories_on_interpreters_-_Flow_diagram.svg as more useful format T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 23:11, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
Response: The file should not be deleted as it provides information about how the information was collected and how the study number was reduced to the specific number of articles included in the review. I think the figure uses a standard PRISMA diagram detailing important information about the review and the removal will delete all that information.
Many thanks and hope this explains.
deleted per nomination. This PDF version is not used on the project and the svg version gives exactly the samen informaion. Elly (talk) 08:07, 11 July 2021 (UTC)