Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2020/12/10
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.svg){kind=link}
_incom.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![203 File:Илья Заславский в дни ГКЧП. Фото обложки журнала "Столица,№ 36 за 1991г.jpg](#File:Илья_Заславский_в_дни_ГКЧП._Фото_обложки_журнала_"Столица,№_36_за_1991г.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
dlesiya3[thp;/elw 153.107.192.203 00:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense. --Achim (talk) 08:35, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Hacker Robux 2806:10AE:9:7C85:F524:699C:2A82:251F 02:57, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Keep: Useless nomination. "Hacker Robux" does not mean anything as to why the logo needs deleting. Slenderman7676 (talk) 07:38, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense request. --Achim (talk) 09:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Blatant copyvio 49.207.130.75 13:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- https://tamil.filmibeat.com/movies/master/fan-photos-2074.html, also on twitter & pinterest. --Achim (talk) 14:42, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, copyvio. --Achim (talk) 14:42, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:29, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Anna (Cookie) (talk) 19:56, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello, im m new here, i would rather write in german. The symbol/logo is under creative common license and used in an article about a german social welfare non commercial initiative. --Basspildstelle (talk) 21:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- I nominated the image for a speedy deletion: obvious copyvio.
- Where is stated that the logo is CC licensed? --JD {æ} 22:15, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: by Reinhard Kraasch. --Minoraxtalk 01:16, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Files mistakenly uploaded by User:NordiskaMuseetBot with wrong metadata
[edit]Files to delete: all the files in the following category, created for this purpose: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_from_Nordiska_museet:_2020-12/delete
Reasons for deletion request: I am the uploader of these files. When preparing my bot upload (User:NordiskaMuseetBot), I accidentaly included duplicates of the files using two different naming schemes. The files included in the category above have incorrectly been labeled to have multiple other versions of the same image, although the listed "other versions" are actually different photos.
When these files are deleted, I can rerun my bot upload which has now been corrected.
Ambrosiani (talk) 23:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted with Túrelio. -- CptViraj (talk) 17:09, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
It was taken from the given source article by Lt Himalaya Konsam Luwanglinux (talk) 11:25, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 00:09, 16 Dezember 2020 UTC: No permission since 8 December 2020 --Krdbot 02:52, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
it was screenshot taken from youtube video from the source mentioned Luwanglinux (talk) 11:28, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 00:11, 16 Dezember 2020 UTC: No permission since 8 December 2020 --Krdbot 02:52, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Inconsistent use of color (H=C?) and presence of H (implicit on methyl, explicit on N). Have File:Acetamide-3D-balls.png as high-quality replacement. DMacks (talk) 04:51, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- I was asked to give my opinion about these (2) files I made - please delete them, there are better ones. I did them years ago. Thanks for asking me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.119.21.203 (talk • contribs)
Delete per nom. Poor-quality image with black background & confusing colouring (different atoms have the same colour). Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 10:30, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Leyo 15:53, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
This image represents ethylcyclohexane, and not in a very stable conformation, not styrene. Category:Styrene has a ton of high-quality images and we also have File:Ethylcyclohexane-3D-balls.png DMacks (talk) 04:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. The black background makes the whole image hardly visible and is hence another quality issue as well. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 10:30, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Leyo 15:51, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
Photos of an unknown musician, OoS in my opinion but also likely copyvios. Commons is not a photo album
- File:Ali X 12.jpg
- File:Ali X 11.jpg
- File:Ali X 10.jpg
- File:Ali X c.jpg
- File:Ali X b.jpg
- File:Ali X a.jpg
- File:Ali X 9.jpg
- File:Ali X 8.jpg
- File:Ali X 7.png
- File:Ali X 6.jpg
- File:Ali X 5.jpg
- File:Ali X 1.jpg
- File:Ali X 3.png
- File:Ali X 4.jpg
- File:Ali X 2.jpg
- File:Ali X.jpg
Gbawden (talk) 06:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:28, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Alireza jam farsadi (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope certificates and copyvio photos of the uploader (he is in them so cant be own work)
- File:Alireza jf.jpg
- File:Alireza Jam.jpg
- File:Alireza Jam farsadi.jpg
- File:Alireza jam farsadi.jpg
- File:Alireza jamfarsadi.jpg
- File:Alireza Jam Farsadi.jpg
Gbawden (talk) 06:19, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:34, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado
[edit]OoS - appears to be a photoshoot of a model - perhaps we could keep one or two but commons is not a photo album. I can't determine whether she is notable with google
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 6.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 1.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 4.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 10.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 8.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 3.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 2.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 12.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 7.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 5.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 11.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 9.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 61.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 44.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 50.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 65.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 60.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 62.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 01.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 53.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 70.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 03.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 63.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 64.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 00.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 02.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 45.jpg
- File:Dellibeth María Vargas Delgado 46.jpg
Gbawden (talk) 07:11, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:32, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by AnyeloTrevi20 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Not own work, all need permission
- File:Cartel pantalla.jpg
- File:World tour.jpg
- File:PORTADAMMM.jpg
- File:Diosa 3.jpg
- File:Diosapremiere.jpg
- File:Diosa 2.jpg
- File:Datesquemeduela.png
- File:Premieraugust.png
- File:Residencyannouncment.jpg.png
- File:Duelaqueme.png
Gbawden (talk) 07:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:34, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
by Vitor Jorge - needs OTRS
Gbawden (talk) 08:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by LeroyBenjamin (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work. Taken from a photoshoot similar to this one in 2019 http://www.twistonline.net/an-exclusive-interview-with-talented-artist-ero-seagull/ - needs OTRS
- File:Ero Seagull Photoshoot in Athens.jpg
- File:Ero Seagull in a Photoshoot .jpg
- File:Ero Seagull.jpg
Gbawden (talk) 08:54, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:50, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Dieugiandixhh (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.
- File:2019-Phuong phap tiep can va ky thuat xay dung bao cao GS MT-XH du an ODA-WB.pdf
- File:Phương pháp tiếp cận lập báo cáo MTXH các dự án ODA.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:52, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:50, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagrams. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:58, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:50, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:52, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:50, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jawad niaz (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
- File:Karate Master Atta Hussain Butt.jpg
- File:Master atta butt with yoshikazu matsushima and joe tailer.jpg
- File:Master Atta Butt with President of International Karate Organization.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:50, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by ဂကောံ စေတနာဍာ်ကၞေဟ် (talk · contribs)
[edit]Derivative works which do not appear to be the creation of the uploader (logos, certificates, maybe a screenshot).
- File:စေတနာပိုဲ.png
- File:8.စေတနာဍာ်ကၞေဟ်.38.jpg
- File:ဗီုဂကောံစေတနာဍာ်ကၞေဟ်.png
- File:လိက် ဂကောံစေတနာဍာ်ကၞေဟ်.jpg
- File:ဂကောံစေတနာဍာ်ကၞေဟ်.png
- File:ဂကောံစေတနာဍာ်ကၞေဟ်လၟေၚ်(၁).png
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:50, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:51, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Vanessastrep (talk · contribs)
[edit]Series of images showing same person, but which do not seem to be by that person, or by the same person. No useful metadata, Facebook sizes on four. The one with large size and metadata is another picture of same person, but does not appear to be own work.
- File:IMG-20200228-WA0023.jpg
- File:IMG-20200720-WA0076.jpg
- File:IMG-20200720-WA0077.jpg
- File:IMG-20200114-WA0079.jpg
- File:Entrevista TV PMERJ.jpg
Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:11, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:51, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Does not appear that the item depicted is own work of the uploader. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:13, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:51, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope Gbawden (talk) 06:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --E4024 (talk) 01:21, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:21, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Same as his twitter profile pic - https://twitter.com/AlexisRossell/photo - which was uploaded in 2017. Needs OTRS as this is not own work Gbawden (talk) 06:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:22, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
File:Alien Drive-Rockband-Rock Alternative-Are You the Enemy-All These Bitter Days-Rock Music.jpg
[edit]
Probably taken from https://www.7milestoparis.com/music-alien-drive-band/alien-drive-rockband-rock-alternative-are-you-the-enemy-all-these-bitter-days-rock-music/ - needs OTRS Gbawden (talk) 06:25, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:22, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/benee performing
[edit]Taken by Spencer Halse whose website says all his images are (c). Uploader claims to be Halse but has only uploaded this image. Think we need OTRS
- File:Benee performing live at Spotify's Front Left Live playlist event in Melbourne (2019).jpg
- File:Benee performing live at Spotify's Front Left Live playlist event in Melbourne (2019) (cropped).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Gbawden (talk) 06:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:21, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Copyright holder @ Victor Yeung Photography per exif. Needs OTRS Gbawden (talk) 07:00, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:21, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/Dino Jelusick In Milano
[edit]Taken from FB per MD and it has the photographers name as a watermark. Not own work. Others by this uploader are also copyvio. Needs OTRS
- File:Dino Jelusick In Milano with Animal Drive, 2018.jpg
- File:Dino Jelusick In Milano with Animal Drive, 2018 (cropped).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Gbawden (talk) 07:14, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:21, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Taken from FB per MD and credited to FotoMimi who is a professional photographer. Needs OTRS. Other uploads of this user have the same issue Gbawden (talk) 07:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:22, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/dj lm
[edit]Credited to 2 different uploaders. Likely copyvio but OoS in my opinion
Gbawden (talk) 07:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:22, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Akashshukla12 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal images that would appear to have little relevance to the scope of the project.
- File:Digital Ibraheem Ali indian Digital marketer.jpg
- File:Bhopal digital Ibraheem Ali.jpg
- File:Moradabad Muslim degree college , Moradabdad, Digital Ibraheem Ali.jpg
- File:Digital ibraheem ali nazim birthday(1).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Herby talk thyme 14:11, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:23, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by ইশতিয়াক আরমান (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Catkin behind administrative building.jpg
- File:Zero Hall.jpg
- File:View from Moynar Deep, NSTU.jpg
- File:Shantiniketan, NSTU.jpg
- File:Rondom road in nstu.jpg
- File:Proshanti Park.jpg
- File:Catkin in NSTU.jpg
- File:Varsity park.jpg
- File:Sunflower in NSTU.jpg
- File:NSTU martyr memorial.jpg
- File:NSTU halls.jpg
- File:NSTU campus from the front.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:44, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:23, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
fantasy diagram, out of project scope Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 09:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:59, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
fantasy diagram, out of project scope Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 09:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:59, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Incorrect license? TinEye finds this at Farsi News... multimedia/photo/13960915000476 - First found on Mar 29, 2018 Filename: 13960915000326636481638156212314_42323_PhotoT.jpg(1050 x 700, 328.4 KB) Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:10, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Kept: I changed the license and added the source. Kept, since Fars News releases its content under the CC-BY 4.0 license. --Ahmadtalk 23:58, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Unused user graphic, uploader has no other live global contributions. Out of project scope. ƏXPLICIT 03:03, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:44, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Masha ivanova meow as duplicate (Duplicate) and the most recent rationale was: File:Стопа.png
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion per Commons:Deletion_policy#Duplicates. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:36, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: by Túrelio. --Minoraxtalk 23:45, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- also file:Afra Atiq ELF.jpg
Small photos without metadata, the user's last remaining uploads. I do not believe own work, probably copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 15:32, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:46, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Complex logos can be in Commons only with OTRS-permission. China has low threshold of originality. Taivo (talk) 15:35, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
- Delete per above. --SCP-2000 02:32, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:46, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
- Request Speedy** Personal information about child and family which may or may not be intentional by the child or family - because there is no guarantee who took the photo & who did the upload. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:07, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Speedy delete per nom. --E4024 (talk) 18:13, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
unused personal photo, sole upload. Pibwl (talk) 18:58, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
unused out of scope, one of 2 uploads. Pibwl (talk) 19:03, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
out of scope - somebody's notes, as well as File:Imaaaag.jpg. Pibwl (talk) 19:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
_incom.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_incom.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
unused screenshoot, doesn't seem to be in a scope, along with File:Image (6) incom.png, File:Image (7) incom.png, File:Image (8) incom.png, File:1teste unv.png and other uploads. Pibwl (talk) 19:09, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
_incom.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_incom.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_incom.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_incom.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
_incom.png){kind=link}
out of scope, sole upload. Pibwl (talk) 19:11, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
unused photo of a person of unknown notability, sole upload, looks proffessional. Pibwl (talk) 19:14, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
out of scope, sole upload. Pibwl (talk) 19:15, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
unused personal photo (and probably depicted person/uploader is not an author). One of 2 uploads. Pibwl (talk) 19:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:49, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
out of scope, sole upload. Pibwl (talk) 19:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:50, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
out of scope, unused, one of 3 uploads. Pibwl (talk) 19:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:50, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
unused personal image, out of scope Migebert (talk) 20:10, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:50, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
out of project scope Didym (talk) 20:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:51, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
unused personal image, out of scope Migebert (talk) 20:38, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:51, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
unused personal image, out of scope Migebert (talk) 20:42, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:51, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ashishsaahoo (talk · contribs)
[edit]unused personal image, out of scope
Migebert (talk) 20:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:51, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Possible copyvioː Album cover CoffeeEngineer (talk) 23:03, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:52, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Out of project scope (Not legitimately in use), and per discussion at COM:AN. Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:57, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Licensing is not the only issue on Commons. This image is simply promotional. --Herby talk thyme 11:43, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 23:53, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Irrelevant to topic Gary Lee Todd (talk) 14:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Uncitoyen as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Cyb97KZuRjY/VsrCR5XD_uI/AAAAAAAAAEw/HwBVnbMci4E/s1600/selin-sogutlugil.jpg
She is a notable writer. I made her a WD item. I also explained the uploader the OTRS permission system. Let us see if they will do anything to save the file. If not, we will delete it. E4024 (talk) 15:03, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
- Indeed, before categorizing the file I saw the black and white version. However, this is a "natural skin colour" pic; and the words (in Turkish) used by the uploader "taken during" etc gave me the impression that the own work claim could be true. We will not lose anything in a week. Hülya Hanım, tekrar hatırlatıyorum: OTRS izin süreci gerekiyor dosyalarınızı silmememiz için. --E4024 (talk) 15:07, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
- Hülya Hanım, sizde bu fotoğrafın orijinal kaydı (daha büyük boyutta ve fotoğraf makinesinin EXIF verilerini gösteren) varsa onu yükleyin lütfen. Ya da fotoğrafçı COM:OTRS yoluyla izin versin. Aksi takdirde dosya silinecek. --E4024 (talk) 15:12, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: No luck on the OTRS permission. We can always undelete if we get lucky enough. --Missvain (talk) 23:58, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Dubious own work; a similar image was deleted before. E4024 (talk) 14:28, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:37, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Posters need OTRS-permission from producing company. Taivo (talk) 14:33, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:37, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Facebook image, seems not uploader's own work. Need OTRS. (｀・ω・´) (talk) 15:26, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:37, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Facebook image, seems not uploader's own work. Need OTRS. (｀・ω・´) (talk) 15:26, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:37, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be uploader's own work. Most likely, the copyright holder of the logo is the company. Yellow Horror (talk) 15:31, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:38, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
photo was uploaded to illustrate an article on wikipedia, which was cancelled, as not enough notorious Pippobuono (talk) 15:39, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:38, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Marshmallow0502 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely own work by uploader, see file size, and subject.
Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:51, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:36, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
unused banner, out of scope. Pibwl (talk) 17:52, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:37, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Low quality, flash flare, not in use, out of COM:SCOPE Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:56, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:37, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
out of scope and/or derivative work. Pibwl (talk) 19:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:36, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
OTRS-permission from author Peter Paech is needed. No evidence, that uploader Hg1234 is the same person. This is the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 19:52, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:35, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Doubtful own Work, seems like a screenshot and out of scope BlinxTheKitty (talk) 21:39, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:35, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The sculptor is Parviz Tanavoli who is still alive. His experss permission is required which can be provided through the OTRS system. 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:52, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:35, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 22:15, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:34, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Request of own uploader because exist a better version of the same photo Ecummenic (talk) 22:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:35, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Possible copyvioː screenshot of a website CoffeeEngineer (talk) 22:39, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:34, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Possible copyvioː Possible stock photos and possible advertisment CoffeeEngineer (talk) 22:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:32, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Incorrect licensing statement: Copies of this image can be found online dating back to 2017, see [1] Rosguill (talk) 23:53, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:33, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
duplicated with https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=89023906 Pikiwiki - Israel free image collection project (talk) 16:50, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted per nomination, also eligible for speedy deletion under criterion F7. -- CptViraj (talk) 07:07, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
duplicated with https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=89023895 Pikiwiki - Israel free image collection project (talk) 16:51, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted per nomination, also eligible for speedy deletion under criterion F7. -- CptViraj (talk) 07:08, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:39, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 12:39, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:53, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 12:41, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
HAY QUE CORREGIR ERRORES LUIS CARRAZCO (talk) 20:13, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Christian Ferrer at 14:40, 2 Januar 2021 UTC: No license since 10 December 2020 --Krdbot 20:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Collage of 5 images, required OTRS permissions. 176.59.32.156 16:21, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:27, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:28, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:26, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:31, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:26, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:35, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:25, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:36, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:24, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:38, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:23, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:39, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:23, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by WybornTrotskiy (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:41, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:23, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
©2016 Mechanics and Mathematics Faculty of BSU E4024 (talk) 16:44, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:46, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:21, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
- File:Princesse Marie-Marguerite de Bourbon (2).jpg
- File:Louis XX et la princesse Marie-Marguerite (2).jpg
- File:Louis XX et la princesse Marie-Marguerite (1).jpg
- File:Princesse Marie-Marguerite de Bourbon (1).jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- EugeneZelenko Oui, je suis bien l'auteur de ces photos. Comment puis-je vous le prouver ? D'ailleurs, je ne crois pas qu'elles puissent toutes être trouvées depuis Google Images. C'est le cas de certaines, mais pas de toutes, me semble-t-il...
There is an OTRS email received for “File:Princesse_Marie-Marguerite_de_Bourbon_(1).jpg” but not processed yet, ticket:2020122110008213. --Mussklprozz (talk) 21:04, 21 December 2020 (UTC)- There is an OTRS email received for “File:Princesse_Marie-Marguerite_de_Bourbon_(2).jpg” but not processed yet, ticket:2020122110008213. --Mussklprozz (talk) 21:05, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
- There is an OTRS email received for “File:Louis_XX_et_la_princesse_Marie-Marguerite_(1).jpg” but not processed yet, ticket:2020122110008213. --Mussklprozz (talk) 21:07, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
- There is an OTRS email received for “File:Louis_XX_et_la_princesse_Marie-Marguerite_(2).jpg” but not processed yet, ticket:2020122110008213. --Mussklprozz (talk) 21:08, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Louis_XX_et_la_princesse_Marie-Marguerite_(2).jpg” under ticket:2020122110008213. --Mussklprozz (talk) 21:11, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Princesse_Marie-Marguerite_de_Bourbon_(2).jpg” under ticket:2020122110008213. --Mussklprozz (talk) 21:11, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Louis_XX_et_la_princesse_Marie-Marguerite_(1).jpg” under ticket:2020122110008213. --Mussklprozz (talk) 21:11, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Princesse_Marie-Marguerite_de_Bourbon_(1).jpg” under ticket:2020122110008213. --Mussklprozz (talk) 21:12, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Keep @EugeneZelenko, there are EXIF data with the pictures, the photographer's name therein is the same name as the name of the person who sent us the permission, therefore I accepted the permissions. --Mussklprozz (talk) 21:15, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
- Bonjour Mussklprozz. A l'inverse, je voudrais faire supprimer la photo dont le lien est entre parenthèses (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Victurnien_Bonaventure_de_Rochechouart_de_Mortemart.jpg). Elle est de moi. Il n'en existe pas d'autre. Cette peinture appartient à une collection privée, un de mes clients. Je l'ai donnée à un expert qui, contre mon souhait, l'a publiée sur son site. Elle a été reprise sur un site de généalogie, Roglo, d'où je l'ai faite enlever et je la retrouve sur Wikipédia où elle se trouve depuis longtemps. Comment dois-je m'y prendre ? Hycnth JK (talk) 15:19, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
- Bonjour @Hycnth JK, désolé, mais puisque le tableau date du 19ème siècle, il est dans le domaine public. Donc je ne vois aucune chance de le supprimer. Cordialement, --Mussklprozz (talk) 21:47, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Kept: ticket:2020122110008213. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:20, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
No FoP in Russia for non-architectural artworks. В OTRS имеется разрешение на снимок памятника от пресс-службы, а не от скульптора. Волонтёр OTRS, Dogad75 (talk) 20:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:16, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
A photo shared on the internet before uploading to Commons see. Probably owner of copyright is someone else or the Turkish Land Forces. Therefore, I suggest it to be deleted. Uncitoyen (talk) 16:15, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:14, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in South Africa A1Cafel (talk) 02:41, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 07:29, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
No FoP in South Africa. This is a modern statue, and the creator is unlikely to have died for 50 years A1Cafel (talk) 02:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 07:24, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in South Africa A1Cafel (talk) 02:47, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Statue is not yet finished, shouldn't bear any copyright. --137.189.204.92 14:46, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Comment This statue is already showing the outline of Nelson Mandela, IMO it exceeds COM:TOO and it deserves copyright. --A1Cafel (talk) 02:15, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Barry Ne (talk) 07:08, 11 December 2020 (UTC) I have taken this picture myself, with consent, no copyright issue
Barry Ne (talk) 07:14, 11 December 2020 (UTC) Do not delete
Delete @Barry Ne: , permission from the sculptor is required to host your image of their artistic work under free license. See also COM:FOP South Africa. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:50, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Info However, don't lose hope @Barry Ne: . An attempt by the Wikipedians' community in South Africa to have FOP introduced in the country is underway. You may look at meta:Wikimedia South Africa/Copyright Amendement Bill. But the road to FOP is full of obstacles: there is a significant opposition against FOP in that country, with the opposition being backed by various groups, like America's International Intellectual Property Alliance. Thus, be vigilant (and if possible include this Meta page in your watchlist). Let's hope for the best. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:38, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 07:26, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in South Africa A1Cafel (talk) 02:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Barry Ne (talk) 07:11, 11 December 2020 (UTC) I have taken this picture myself at the unveiling, in public, no copyright issue
Barry Ne (talk) 07:14, 11 December 2020 (UTC) Do not delete
- Delete @Barry Ne: This building isn't simple, so even you take it yourself, it can't be freely licensed. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:02, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Barry Ne (talk) 15:11, 24 December 2020 (UTC) I do not understand this, but will oblige by the rules. It was taken in the public domain at the unveiling. Journalists were also taken photos which appeared worldwide. I did not sell the photo and had no monetary gain out of it. It’s similar with the work in progress photo of the artist working on the statue. In that case it was not in the public domain but the artist gave consent for the picture. I did not ask for consent to be used in Wikipedia. As I said, if I have transgressed then Wikipedia has rights to remove it. If this rule applies generally then I believe no (or only a very small amount) photos of buildings or statues will be legally on Wikipedia. If I understand this correct it means that consent is not good enough; it has to be consent to be used on Wikipedia. I humbly then comment that Wikipedia will lose its attraction. If it was not my photo obviously there would be copyright issues. Lastly I also do not get recognition for the photo (which I do not want), but this will make me think twice before I write another article on Wikipedia and I want to, because it’s a living encyclopedia
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 07:27, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
No FoP in South Africa. This is a modern statue, and the creator is unlikely to have died for 50 years A1Cafel (talk) 02:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 07:27, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
No FoP in South Africa. This is a modern statue, and the creator is unlikely to have died for 50 years A1Cafel (talk) 02:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- As far as I know, this only refers to art objects INSIDE a building, not art objects which can be viewed at public places. Regards --Olga Ernst (talk) 10:39, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
--Olga Ernst (talk) 13:12, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete @Olga Ernst: South African copyright law does not recognize free publishing and distribution of copies of copyrighted artistic works online. COM:FOP South Africa, their exceptions to the copyright of architects, sculptors, or their heirs are only limited to "cinematograph film or a television broadcast or transmission in a diffusion service". Diffusion is defined as something related to telecommunications service, but not online. Permission from the sculptor to publish images of their artistic work under free licensing is required. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:57, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
- Info @Olga Ernst: an attempt by the Wikipedians' community in South Africa to have FOP introduced in the country is underway. You may look at meta:Wikimedia South Africa/Copyright Amendement Bill. But the road to FOP is full of obstacles. There is a significant opposition against FOP in that country, with the opposition being backed by various groups, like America's International Intellectual Property Alliance. Thus, be vigilant (and if possible include this Meta page in your watchlist). Let's hope for the best. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:37, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks @JWilz12345: for the information ! Regards --Olga Ernst (talk) 13:12, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 07:28, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Source claims (C) all rights reserved. Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:20, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:52, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely own work at this size and quality. Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:21, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:52, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Author & uploader name are not the same. No indication of own work, small size, low quality. May not be the same image as previously deleted. Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:23, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; PCP. --Gbawden (talk) 09:52, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
This file is probably copied from here or from here, the time of publication of the photo in the news agencies is ahead of its upload time here. Also, in the photo is the logo of a political party, which is most likely protected by copyright. Mehman 97 14:49, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 22:11, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
Re-uploading the deleted file, see talk page. Mehman 97 13:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Speedy delete Per COM:CSD#G4. StayC, Bae173 and music fans [ talk to me ] 14:40, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:50, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
File:MSc thesis (2019), Ei Phyu Phyu Aung*, Dr. Khin Khin Lay*. Occurrence and relative abundance of some prawn species from Hlaing River Segment ,Shwepyithar township, Yangon Region, Myanmar.pdf
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:50, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:50, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:53, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:50, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:53, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:50, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
File:FICHE D’INVENTAIRE DU PATRIMOINE CULTUREL IMMATÉRIEL Le carnaval de Cayenne et le touloulou du bal paré-masqué.pdf
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:56, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:00, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Photo appears to have been taken from https://www.anp-archief.nl/page/156471/hilversum-nederland-1-januari-1979 - you may use it, but "Not for commercial use" - so violation of copyrights JopkeB (talk) 16:11, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
(talk) Gershowitz 14:34, 13 December 2020 (UTC) De foto is geen probleem. Hij mag door de maker (Kippa) voor non commerciële doeleinden, zoals Wikipedia is, gebruikt worden.
Beste @Gershowitz: Helaas, als een foto wordt opgenomen in Wikipedia, dan móét hij in WikimediaCommons zijn opgenomen en daar geldt dat hij (ook) commercieel gebruikt móét kunnen worden, zie Acceptable_licenses. Dus een foto die niet commercieel gebruikt mag worden, mag niet in Commons opgenomen worden (wordt daar uit verwijderd) en kan dus ook niet gebruikt worden op Wikipedia. JopkeB (talk) 18:09, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Beste JopkeB, dat wist ik niet. Verwijdert u de foto of moet ik hem verwijderen? Ik probeer een andere foto te regelen die wel voldoet aan de eisen. Bedankt voor de info.Groeten @Gershowitz: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gershowitz (talk • contribs) 09:49, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Beste Gershowitz, Nee, ik kan alleen voorstellen voor verwijdering doen en u kunt hem ook niet zelf verwijderen. Dat wordt gedaan door een moderator. JopkeB (talk) 14:30, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Delete Uploader Gershowitz understands why this photo should be deleted. Conclusion: The file may now be deleted. JopkeB (talk) 14:30, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:47, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
This picture is a screenshot from a YouTube video that was NOT uploaded with a Creative Commons license. Davidng913 (talk) 16:15, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:49, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
A photo shared on the internet before uploading to Commons see. Probably owner of copyright is someone else or the Turkish Land Forces. Therefore, I suggest it to be deleted. Uncitoyen (talk) 16:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:47, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
I am sorry but this is indeed my work, i took this picture myself, i am a journalist and this is a picture of my husband Κωνσταντίνος Δ. Μπλιάτκας. ΧΙΟΝΙΑ ΒΛΑΧΟΥ
- Maybe you should better not upload it to Facebook before. Could you kindly upload directly from your computer so we may see the camera EXIF? Eupharisto polu. --E4024 (talk) 01:24, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep per uploader comment. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 12:56, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: Please upload the original straight from your camera (this one came from FB) or provide permission via OTRS\. --Gbawden (talk) 09:46, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Please see User talk:আবু জার গিফারী. E4024 (talk) 16:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --Gbawden (talk) 09:47, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by DOMINIQUE PIERRU (talk · contribs)
[edit]Commons:Derivative works from newspaper.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:50, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Keep Le texte sur la photo File:Le Démocrate de l'Aisne rajeunit.jpg est totalement illisible. Tout le reste n’est que de la composition typographique. Pour la photo File:Page du démocrate de l'Aisne.jpg une autorisation OTRS a été demandée. The text in the picture File: Le Démocrate de l'Aisne rajeunit.jpg is completely illegible. Everything else is just typographical composition. For the photo File:Page du démocrate de l'Aisne.jpg an OTRS authorization has been requested. Please wait. Merci de patienter. --Claude Truong-Ngoc (talk) 21:05, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Page_du_démocrate_de_l'Aisne.jpg” under ticket:2020121110003844. Ruthven (msg) 15:11, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Kept: One with OTRS kept, the other is a copyvio as its found on the web. --Gbawden (talk) 09:45, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
logo of some fur shop in Ukraine, lack of notability, unused. Pibwl (talk) 17:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Appears to be an advertisement, not own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:56, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Delete per it is copyrighted work--Zache (talk) 10:50, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Destroyeraa as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Who is TyphoonPi? I doubt this user owns a satellite. Which is absolutely correct. But image is in use, and I am hoping we can either find a source - or a replacement image so changing to Nomination to gain a week. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:01, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:42, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
No evidence of licensing Kautilya3 (talk) 18:04, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:41, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
unused photo of missing person from FBI website, sole upload. Probably not notable. Anyway, FBI presumably did not take the photo and have no copyright. Pibwl (talk) 18:57, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:41, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Нет подтверждения авторских прав у автора загрузки через OTRS. Автор фотографии неизвестен. Dogad75 (talk) 22:40, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Что значит неизвестен? В Summary дано имя автора.Господин Григорий Спиваковский.Человек загрузил свое произведение.Человек дал от своего имени свободную лицензию. Вы предлагаете убрать фотографию,используя заведомо несоответствующую действительности мотивировку.Зачем? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2A02:8109:B5C0:53DC:F45A:9292:FB17:CBA4 (talk) 20:35, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
- Спиваковский был на съезде как независимый фотограф.Потому авторские права остались у него и не ушли в государственные агентства. Он работал для межрегиональной группы,был активистом.И пропуск ему оформляла группа ,а не Тасс и не РИА Новости. Спиваковский отдал права автора в общественное достояние.В чем претензия к его фотографии? это какое-то недоразумение. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilya Zaslavskiy (talk • contribs) 23:06, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
- Вы неверно написали,что автор неизвестен. Это размещение собственного материала. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yanta17 (talk • contribs) 10:41, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
NOTICE: Copyright holder has been notified to send confirmation to OTRS. --MultiPolitikus (talk) 16:30, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Dear Sir or Madam,
I hereby affirm that I, Grigory Spivakovsky, am the creator and sole owner of the exclusive copyright of the following media work: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ельцин_и_Заславский_на_съезде_народных_депутатов_СССР.jpg I agree to publish the above-mentioned work under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International. I acknowledge that by doing so I grant anyone the right to use the work, even in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws. I am aware that this agreement is not limited to Wikipedia or related sites. I am aware that the copyright holder always retains ownership of the copyright as well as the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be claimed to have been made by the copyright holder. I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.
Grigory Spivakovsky.
Все отправил по электронной почте. Извините, что не сделал сразу, но просто недостаточно знал порядки Википедии. Считал, что раз при вводе фотографии занес все необходимую информацию, то этого достаточно.
Григорий Спиваковский. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grigoriy Spivakovskiy (talk • contribs) 19:20, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
User Dogad75, correct me if I’m wrong, but seems to me since the owner of the photo has given his confirmation of ownership there is no need to delete the photo due to copyright violation. Many thanks to user MultiPolitikus for making terms of use clear. Unfortunately, they are not always obvious from the templates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vero Oats (talk • contribs) 11:17, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
- The file has now OTRS permission. --Krd 15:28, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Kept: Now has OTRS. --Gbawden (talk) 09:38, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Possible copyvioː screenshot NES game, Back to the Future, PS3 and Dragon Ball Evolution screenshots CoffeeEngineer (talk) 22:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep: This looks to fall under the de minimis doctrine; the copyrightable images found within this image are not of sufficient resolution to warrant a copyright-infringement claim. The screenshot in the panel of the second set of images in the bottom right is not copyrightable generally. There are, I presume, a number of potentially copyrightable images within this image, but none is so ostentatious as to be considered the main component of the image. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 14:21, 13 January 2021 (UTC).
Deleted: While some of the images might be DM its DW - a compilation of numerous images found elswhere. No evidence that the images used are PD. --Gbawden (talk) 09:39, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Small and not used picture of an unknown person CoffeeEngineer (talk) 22:53, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Hey, first of all it is not "not used". Secondly, avoid saying "small file", "small picture" etc. People do not like that. (Been there.) Keep per inuse, in case no copyright problem exist. E4024 (talk) 22:58, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
ːː It is strange, it went to a list of picture not included on a page. I will remove the deletion request.--CoffeeEngineer (talk) 23:12, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Kept: INUSE but likely copyvio, hard to prove after so much time. --Gbawden (talk) 09:35, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Improperly licensed image: file information asserts that it was the uploading editor's own work, but also clearly establishes that it was pulled from ABC Australia's website, which reserves copyright. Rosguill (talk) 23:19, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:34, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
While uploaded in good faith, appears to be Flickr washing, and not particularly good washing either judging by the EXIF data which credits the photo to "ZACH GIBSON/AFP/Getty Images". cantfightthetendies on Flickr has two followers and is unlikely to be Zach Gibson. FDW777 (talk) 23:40, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- ;-; ok. It's such a good image, what a shame. Yea this is a Flickr washing account apparently he owns the rights to this image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131295020@N06/26921780819/. Vallee01 (talk) 23:44, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Per here. StayC, Bae173 and music fans [ talk to me ] 07:00, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:36, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Potentially fake pseudo-historical banner - no valid reliable source; no relevant iconography... There is known only yellow background for naval banner of the Emperor of Russia (see [2])-- Kaganer (talk) 00:39, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
- Delete per nom. Wikisaurus (talk) 20:02, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:03, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Out of project scope. Rocky Masum (talk) 01:39, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: low quality, bad cropping, many other pictures of rickshaws are available. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 02:27, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Statue of a man who died in 1941. The sign seems to indicate the year of death of the subject of the statue. It is dubious if the sculptor really died before 1948, as required for {{PD-1996}}, or before 1962, as required for {{PD-old-50}}. Stefan4 (talk) 00:56, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:55, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
It appears this is a statue in Russia. Freedom of panorama in Russia is only limited to architecture and garden designs, not other artworks like fine arts (statues and sculptures). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:24, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- I wonder, who built it? Some of the Russian words below this statue seems fairly broken, which may be {{PD-old-assumed}} possible? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: It is not in Russia but in Kyrgyzstan; however, according to COM:FOP Kyrgyzstan it should be deleted. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 02:30, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
- inappropriate Pia Prijon Mužina (talk) 14:40, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
copyvio --Hladnikm (talk) 04:03, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: The cover of the book published in 1981, copyright violation. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 02:39, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Coypright violation; photo is on https://specialarad.ro/in-cautarea-aradeanului-pierdut-jacques-faix-un-clasic-al-pictorialismului-fotografic/ with copyright © Magyar Fotográfiai Múzeum; on http://fotomuzeum.hu/jogi_nyilatkozat is stated that copies are only allowed for non-business purposes JopkeB (talk) 16:36, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Kept: The author died in 1950, PD according to Romanian law. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 02:47, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sunnygirllight (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlike own works. missing EXIF, also could be found on Google.
Larryasou (talk) 03:20, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:19, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No indication of a free license at source Gbawden (talk) 08:47, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:20, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Died in 1996, unlikely to be own work Gbawden (talk) 08:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:20, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Author "MAIKE HELBIG " per exif. Needs OTRS Gbawden (talk) 09:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:21, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
1971 photo, dubious claim of own work Gbawden (talk) 08:47, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 11:24, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in South Africa A1Cafel (talk) 02:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 03:46, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in South Africa A1Cafel (talk) 02:46, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 03:47, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
No FoP in South Africa. This is a modern statue, and the creator is unlikely to have died for 50 years A1Cafel (talk) 02:46, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 03:48, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barangays 103, 104 & 105, Zone 9, District II, Grace Park East, Caloocan City
[edit]Unfortunately, the company Lexton Marketing Corporation was established on November 7, 2002, and Google Maps pinpoints its HQ to this building at the corner of 8th Avenue and 9th Street. The two-month discussion at Commons concluded just before the end of November with a prevailing status quo - no freedom of panorama in the Philippines. In this UAE FOP-related deletion request that I read recently, "deletion first is the right approach in accordance with Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle": Commons always respects the rights of the artists and architects, even if the general public of the country of origin (the Philippines) of the depicted work does not. Also no FOP in this proposed amendment to the copyright law though.
.jpg){kind=link}
- File:9625Complex Caloocan City Hall Landmarks 10.jpg
- File:9625Complex Caloocan City Hall Landmarks 39.jpg
- File:9625Complex Caloocan City Hall Landmarks 40.jpg
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:47, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- The very Lis mota or Crux of New FOP discussions is: Get a written Reply from the IPO director and DOJ Secretary towards the Executive Secretary: the photos were taken for the purpose of putting some pictures for the very very vast Category:Barangays 103, 104 & 105, Zone 9, District II, Grace Park East, Caloocan City; let me underscore that I joined the Discussions for a single purpose: to prevent Mass Deletions of the i am a smart one and i am a smart one's principal and co-conspirator in the discussed Cybersquatting Cyber-stalking lengthily argued by me; not that in almost all Deletion Requests here in all my Archives I regularly reply with "submitted to the sound discretion of Commons", I reiterate my Neutrality in all Deletions Requests or change of Category names, since my photos are subject of the Deletions and I put to Commons editors the judgment on them; but I cannot cannot cannot be silent on i am a smart one; and co-conspirators; I mystically discern and unmasked them but who will believe me here; Commons is bound by Rules and Policies and will not buy my Mystic assertions; ergo, I wrote long Legal treatises to Stop i am a smart one from Erasing Mass Files from Commons by craft, wits and expertise in JavaScript, inter alia; Judgefloro (talk) 09:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:58, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted shop banner. The copyright belongs to the graphic artist; the owner just holds only physical ownership. Also, no total freedom of panorama in the Philippines, most especially 2D graphic artworks like shop banners. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Buenas tardes I was looking for the exact address and Barangay number and street for my Category in Kalookan Wikimedia since I was roaming and walking street by street to photo at least 2 or more pictures for 1 Barangay of Calookan] and when I found this I shot it; I should have Uploaded a new version to hide it or at least crop it when possible; Judgefloro (talk) 09:01, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Judgefloro: I'm afraid that option may run counter to COM:OVERWRITE. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:52, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete: advertising, no educational value, out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 03:34, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
photo missing Pikiwiki - Israel free image collection project (talk) 16:44, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:CSD#F7. --4nn1l2 (talk) 09:32, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
duplicated with https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=89984787 Pikiwiki - Israel free image collection project (talk) 16:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:CSD#F7. --4nn1l2 (talk) 09:34, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
duplicated with https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=89984791 Pikiwiki - Israel free image collection project (talk) 16:46, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:CSD#F7. --4nn1l2 (talk) 09:34, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
duplicated with https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=89023891 Pikiwiki - Israel free image collection project (talk) 16:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:CSD#F7. --4nn1l2 (talk) 09:34, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
duplicated wit https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=89069911 Pikiwiki - Israel free image collection project (talk) 16:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:CSD#F7. --4nn1l2 (talk) 09:34, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --4nn1l2 (talk) 09:36, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Unnecessary redirect. João Justiceiro (talk) 18:01, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --4nn1l2 (talk) 09:37, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
- @4nn1l2: Are you sure? I made requests like this in the last few months and in all of them, the redirect has been deleted. João Justiceiro (talk) 03:50, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Unnecessary redirect. João Justiceiro (talk) 18:01, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --4nn1l2 (talk) 09:38, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
- @4nn1l2: Are you sure? I made requests like this in the last few months and in all of them, the redirect has been deleted. João Justiceiro (talk) 03:49, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
User talk: Wikivea Wikivea (talk) 08:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --ƏXPLICIT 04:38, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
ARQUIVO REPETIDO GRAVETO CAPOEIRA (talk) 18:01, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: author request. ƏXPLICIT 04:40, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
- also file:She back komal.png
Unused files, educational value is unclear. Maybe out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 12:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:37, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
No indication of own work, small size, low quality and apparently derivative work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:21, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 02:22, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
제 사진인데 제가 업로드 한 적이 없습니다 삭제 요청합니다. 누군가가 사칭해서 올린 것 같습니다. MINTBOX0619 (talk) 02:50, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- @-revi: Can you close this? --Minoraxtalk 05:57, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --ƏXPLICIT 02:23, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files in Category:UST Museum of Arts and Sciences 1
[edit]Selected files show photographs, some colored and some black and white. In effect resulting in becoming derivative works of the photographs themselves (case of images within an image). While some can be argued as {{PD-Philippines}}, the uploader hasn't provided much information about the authorship of these photographs. COM:DM cannot also be applied, as there is a possibility of misusing of these files to gain commercial advantage at the expense of the copyright holders' (either the photographer or the institution) economic rights, and as per Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle this must be avoided. Commons respects the copyrights of the rightholders (be it the photographers or their heirs), even if the general public does not.
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9709 20.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9709 21.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9709 26.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9709 28.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9709 30.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9709 31.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9709 33.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9709 34.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9709 36.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9709 37.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9739 06.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9739 07.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9739 08.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9739 09.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9739 10.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9739 13.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9739 14.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9739 15.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9739 18.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9739 19.JPG
- File:FvfUSTmuseum9739 20.JPG
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:31, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Buenas noches It was my first visit to ailing Leonardo Legaspi the First Rector of UST; I told him that I met him as he was descending the St. Vincent's Seminary 2nd floor to visit LEGASPI, DOMINGO Z.; Meycauayan, Bulacan; May 5, 1981; Roll No. 31114 whom I recruited as seminarian; their mothers and my mother met weekly for 3 years religiously when they visited us 3 pm; I talkeed with him for 9 minutes at his room before his 4 pm cancer operation; 2 weeks before his death on 8 August 2014; I told him that my father Florentino and his father were close friends and met very often; he was so depressed when I told him that Our Lady of the Holy Rosary is beneath him; but he loudly told me "Do you not know that I was the Archbishop of Caceres for 8 years" and I added First UST Rector and even Auxiliary Bishop of Manila, even if all the UST Doctors now were under you, but your time has come ... Leonardo Legaspi granted me express permission and even asked me to take photos of UST which he loved so much ... I granted his Dying wish I leave the matter for the sound discretion of Commons editors; sincerely Judgefloro (talk) 09:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Permission must come from the authors/artists, and not the owner. Also, without tangible proof of contract transferring copyright, copyright on the commissioned works remain with the creators/authors, and the museum management only owns these physically, as per RA 8293's provision on commissioned works. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:54, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
- Buenas noches It was my first visit to ailing Leonardo Legaspi the First Rector of UST; I told him that I met him as he was descending the St. Vincent's Seminary 2nd floor to visit LEGASPI, DOMINGO Z.; Meycauayan, Bulacan; May 5, 1981; Roll No. 31114 whom I recruited as seminarian; their mothers and my mother met weekly for 3 years religiously when they visited us 3 pm; I talkeed with him for 9 minutes at his room before his 4 pm cancer operation; 2 weeks before his death on 8 August 2014; I told him that my father Florentino and his father were close friends and met very often; he was so depressed when I told him that Our Lady of the Holy Rosary is beneath him; but he loudly told me "Do you not know that I was the Archbishop of Caceres for 8 years" and I added First UST Rector and even Auxiliary Bishop of Manila, even if all the UST Doctors now were under you, but your time has come ... Leonardo Legaspi granted me express permission and even asked me to take photos of UST which he loved so much ... I granted his Dying wish I leave the matter for the sound discretion of Commons editors; sincerely Judgefloro (talk) 09:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 02:25, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:UST Museum of Arts and Sciences 2
[edit]These two files are derivative works, incorporating a photo of the Filipino architect with the death year indicated: 1994. It might have been created before that year, but certainly not old enough to be considered public domain, hence invalidating the "ageless" claim in the description.
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:38, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Buenas noches It was my first visit to ailing Leonardo Legaspi the First Rector of UST; I told him that I met him as he was descending the St. Vincent's Seminary 2nd floor to visit LEGASPI, DOMINGO Z.; Meycauayan, Bulacan; May 5, 1981; Roll No. 31114 whom I recruited as seminarian; their mothers and my mother met weekly for 3 years religiously when they visited us 3 pm; I talkeed with him for 9 minutes at his room before his 4 pm cancer operation; 2 weeks before his death on 8 August 2014; I told him that my father Florentino and his father were close friends and met very often; he was so depressed when I told him that Our Lady of the Holy Rosary is beneath him; but he loudly told me "Do you not know that I was the Archbishop of Caceres for 8 years" and I added First UST Rector and even Auxiliary Bishop of Manila, even if all the UST Doctors now were under you, but your time has come ... Leonardo Legaspi granted me express permission and even asked me to take photos of UST which he loved so much ... I granted his Dying wish I leave the matter for the sound discretion of Commons editors; sincerely Judgefloro (talk) 09:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Permission must come from the authors/artists, and not the owner. Also, without tangible proof of contract transferring copyright, copyright on the commissioned works remain with the creators/authors, and the museum management only owns these physically, as per RA 8293's provision on commissioned works. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:54, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
- Buenas noches It was my first visit to ailing Leonardo Legaspi the First Rector of UST; I told him that I met him as he was descending the St. Vincent's Seminary 2nd floor to visit LEGASPI, DOMINGO Z.; Meycauayan, Bulacan; May 5, 1981; Roll No. 31114 whom I recruited as seminarian; their mothers and my mother met weekly for 3 years religiously when they visited us 3 pm; I talkeed with him for 9 minutes at his room before his 4 pm cancer operation; 2 weeks before his death on 8 August 2014; I told him that my father Florentino and his father were close friends and met very often; he was so depressed when I told him that Our Lady of the Holy Rosary is beneath him; but he loudly told me "Do you not know that I was the Archbishop of Caceres for 8 years" and I added First UST Rector and even Auxiliary Bishop of Manila, even if all the UST Doctors now were under you, but your time has come ... Leonardo Legaspi granted me express permission and even asked me to take photos of UST which he loved so much ... I granted his Dying wish I leave the matter for the sound discretion of Commons editors; sincerely Judgefloro (talk) 09:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 02:25, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Derivative work of a collage of different photos. The most prominent is a modern photo, who is the photographer and/or copyright holder of the most prominent photo here? As Commons mandates commercial reuses (see Commons:Licensing#Acceptable licenses), we don't know if the copyright holder of the most prominent photo here would allow reuses of this image file in media like commercial post cards and calendars without their authorization. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:15, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Buenas noches It was my first visit to ailing Leonardo Legaspi the First Rector of UST; I told him that I met him as he was descending the St. Vincent's Seminary 2nd floor to visit LEGASPI, DOMINGO Z.; Meycauayan, Bulacan; May 5, 1981; Roll No. 31114 whom I recruited as seminarian; their mothers and my mother met weekly for 3 years religiously when they visited us 3 pm; I talkeed with him for 9 minutes at his room before his 4 pm cancer operation; 2 weeks before his death on 8 August 2014; I told him that my father Florentino and his father were close friends and met very often; he was so depressed when I told him that Our Lady of the Holy Rosary is beneath him; but he loudly told me "Do you not know that I was the Archbishop of Caceres for 8 years" and I added First UST Rector and even Auxiliary Bishop of Manila, even if all the UST Doctors now were under you, but your time has come ... Leonardo Legaspi granted me express permission and even asked me to take photos of UST which he loved so much ... I granted his Dying wish I leave the matter for the sound discretion of Commons editors; sincerely
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:08, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Derivative work of a recent painting. Invalidating the uploader's claim of "ageless, timeless" etc, full resolution download of this image reveals some details. The artist behind the artwork is Melanio "Thirdy" Bulauitan III, who hails from the Polytechnic University of the Philippines and is still alive. No indication that the uploader obtained permission from Thirdy in uploading their photo of his artwork at Commons, which obliges all files must be freely reusable by anyone including commercial media like post cards, calendar, and T-shirt prints. But as a country with high value on arts and culture, it is unlikely that Thirdy will accept the conditions stated at Commons:Licensing#Acceptable licenses. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Buenas noches It was my first visit to ailing Leonardo Legaspi the First Rector of UST; I told him that I met him as he was descending the St. Vincent's Seminary 2nd floor to visit LEGASPI, DOMINGO Z.; Meycauayan, Bulacan; May 5, 1981; Roll No. 31114 whom I recruited as seminarian; their mothers and my mother met weekly for 3 years religiously when they visited us 3 pm; I talkeed with him for 9 minutes at his room before his 4 pm cancer operation; 2 weeks before his death on 8 August 2014; I told him that my father Florentino and his father were close friends and met very often; he was so depressed when I told him that Our Lady of the Holy Rosary is beneath him; but he loudly told me "Do you not know that I was the Archbishop of Caceres for 8 years" and I added First UST Rector and even Auxiliary Bishop of Manila, even if all the UST Doctors now were under you, but your time has come ... Leonardo Legaspi granted me express permission and even asked me to take photos of UST which he loved so much ... I granted his Dying wish I leave the matter for the sound discretion of Commons editors; sincerely Judgefloro (talk) 09:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:07, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Derivative work of a painting, made by Fernando Amorsolo who died on April 24, 1972. Undelete in 2023 (?, because may have COM:URAA copyright restoration issue) Description plates seen here state the dates of creation of both Amorsolo paintings as "illegible", however. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 15:42, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- I stay neutral on this and other Deletions of yours and may I copy paste hereunder as important note and part hereof my Request to put on hold the deletions until a until a Reply be sent per Emails or written documents by the IPO - Bureau of Copyright Directors Judgefloro (talk) 09:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:09, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted poster, which contains underlying photos (mixture of old and new photos). Such objects are copyrightable (category "pictorial illustrations and advertisements") according to Ms. Emmelina Masanque of IPOPHL (in the October 30, 2020 FB Live webinar of the Office for Alternative Dispute Resolution or OADR, point 40:27 of the webinar). To add a note, that webinar was also attended and witnessed by head of IPOPHL, Dir. Gen. Atty. Rowel Barba. Meanwhile, COM:Licensing states files must be freely reusable by anyone, including for commercial purposes. Without permission from the copyright holder of the poster, preferrably via COM:OTRS, this cannot be kept at Commons. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 15:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- It seems that the photo is taken off feet away, and ergo, nobody can copy this for reproduction;
- I stay neutral on this and other Deletions of yours and may I copy paste hereunder as important note and part hereof my Request to put on hold the deletions until a until a Reply be sent per Emails or written documents by the IPO - Bureau of Copyright Directors Judgefloro (talk) 09:05, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- "Photo is taken off feet away" when the subject is clearly the main motive of the image, and "nobody can copy this for reproduction" is not OK per COM:PCP. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:35, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:08, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
File:554SiningSaysay Philippine History in Art Sining Lakbay GateWay Gallery, Gateway Mall Araneta Center 36.jpg
[edit]
Derivative work of a page of a book with an underlying photograph. Result = image within an image. Also copyvio of a copyrighted book. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 15:56, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- I stay neutral on this and other Deletions of yours and may I copy paste hereunder as important note and part hereof my Request to put on hold the deletions until a until a Reply be sent per Emails or written documents by the IPO - Bureau of Copyright Directors Judgefloro (talk) 09:06, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:15, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
File:554SiningSaysay Philippine History in Art Sining Lakbay GateWay Gallery, Gateway Mall Araneta Center 35.jpg
[edit]
Derivative work of a page of a copyrighted book with an underlying photograph that is obviously copyrighted (not black and white). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:00, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- The photo is taken off feet away hence one cannot profit from copying this;
- I stay neutral on this and other Deletions of yours and may I copy paste hereunder as important note and part hereof my Request to put on hold the deletions until a until a Reply be sent per Emails or written documents by the IPO - Bureau of Copyright Directors Judgefloro (talk) 09:07, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
- De minimis cannot be applied. The subject is not incidental. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:04, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:14, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
The conclusion of Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2020/11#Kuwait and FOP is that there's no freedom of panorama in Kuwait, even in the new 2019 copyright law of the country. A SkyscraperCity.com discussion thread reveals this tower nearing its completion around mid-late 2006, and obviously recent. In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for a certain period of time after the death of the creator (be it the last-surviving architect, engineer, designer, sculptor, engraver, or painter). An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception Commons:Freedom of panorama (FoP). Sadly, Kuwait has no Commons-applicable FoP. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:52, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 03:34, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
This work is not necessarily out of copyright in the UK ( Oliver G. Pike (1877–1963) ) . Undelete in 2033?
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14564450240).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14564453120).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14564459890).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14564468018).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14564473209).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14564473670).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14564481208).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14564491818).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14564496080).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14564522308).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14728162096).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14748806074).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14748821994).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14750845802).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14750864842).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14751138575).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14751158515).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14751159585).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14751176875).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14771004663).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (1901) (14771016733).jpg
- File:Woodland, field and shore - wild nature depicted with pen and camera (IA woodlandfieldsho00pike).pdf
_(14564450240).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14564453120).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14564459890).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14564468018).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14564473209).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14564473670).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14564481208).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14564491818).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14564496080).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14564522308).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14728162096).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14748806074).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14748821994).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14750845802).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14750864842).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14751138575).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14751158515).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14751159585).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14751176875).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14771004663).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14771016733).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:58, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 03:35, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The subject from ticket:2016073110003101 kindly asks us to delete file. The en/dewiki articles have been deleted (see here). Bencemac (talk) 11:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 03:33, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
A poor copy-paste of a swastika over a propsed Estonian flag. Doesn't carry any artistic or infomational value. No description added but considering the source it is most likely a a work of amateur pro-Russia/anti-West propaganda. 212.225.218.214 17:51, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 19:43, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Still from Youtube video with no explicit release form Youtube's usual terms and conditions Headlock0225 (talk) 14:16, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --✗plicit 03:53, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Clearly taken from http://www.persianfootball.com/news/2016/01/17/persepolis-set-to-sign-tractor-sazi-goalkeeper-mehrdad-tahmasbi/ Sir Sputnik (talk) 03:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 18:53, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
non-free media (poster) Pemasangan papan nama stasiun KA Baru (2020 ver.) (talk) 03:20, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
-2020-12-10T03:20:00.000Z-File:IMDb_LofL_Poster.png){kind=link}
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 18:40, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Probably taken from https://fjarill.de/en/photos/ - needs OTRS Gbawden (talk) 09:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 18:34, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
copyright violation? Theroadislong (talk) 09:36, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 18:33, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
copyright violation Theroadislong (talk) 09:36, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 18:33, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
copyright violation Theroadislong (talk) 09:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 18:33, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Low Resolution, No Camera Data, Resized from Original Photo, May be the uploader is the person in the photo. Clear copyright violation of the original photographer. Also good chances to get the photo of this living person. Suggest to delete. 27.97.219.51 09:51, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 18:32, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Low Resolution, No Camera Data, Resized from Original Photo. Clear copyright violation of the original photographer. Also good chances to get the photo of this living person. Suggest to delete. Ranjithsiji (talk) 10:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 18:32, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
clearly promotional spam logos, unused, as well as File:New-loog.png, File:Cover template change brand ezone.png, File:Ezone new brand without caption.png. When the firm becomes notable, somebody sure would upload its logo. Pibwl (talk) 10:12, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 18:31, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
plain promotional spam text, out of scope, along with File:Over-years text.png, File:New-brand text.png and a bunch of random web page elements: File:Arrow down ezone.png, File:Gplus ezone.png, File:Fb ezone.png, File:Lin ezone.png. Pibwl (talk) 10:14, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 18:30, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Appears to be a screenshot, not an original work Ytoyoda (talk) 13:25, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- [[Category:Original]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanaelmansouri (talk • contribs) 13:47, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 18:28, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Unused and unexplained icon, No educational use. Malcolma (talk) 14:05, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 18:27, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Although the dish is very old, there is no evidence that Sotherby's have released their photograph into the public domain Aa77zz (talk) 14:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- In addition, the source http://www.alaintruong.com/archives/2017/10/17/35777746.html includes the text " © Sotheby's." under the photograph. - Aa77zz (talk) 14:47, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 18:27, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
The conclusion of Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2020/11#Kuwait and FOP is that there's no freedom of panorama in Kuwait, even in the new 2019 copyright law of the country. This tower was completed in 2009, and designed by Fentress Architects. In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for a certain period of time after the death of the creator (be it the last-surviving architect, engineer, designer, sculptor, engraver, or painter). An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception Commons:Freedom of panorama (FoP). Sadly, Kuwait has no Commons-applicable FoP. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:20, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Added note: enwiki has mentioned its principal architect, Curtis W. Fentress (1947–, still alive unfortunately). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:35, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ✗plicit 13:15, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
The conclusion of Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2020/11#Kuwait and FOP is that there's no freedom of panorama in Kuwait, even in the new 2019 copyright law of the country. This tower was completed in 2009, and designed by Fentress Architects (led by architect Curtis W. Fentress, 1947–). The other tower here is part of the same complex and is most likely modern. In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for a certain period of time after the death of the creator (be it the last-surviving architect, engineer, designer, sculptor, engraver, or painter). An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception Commons:Freedom of panorama (FoP). Sadly, Kuwait has no Commons-applicable FoP. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:31, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ✗plicit 13:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
The conclusion of Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2020/11#Kuwait and FOP is that there's no freedom of panorama in Kuwait, even in the new 2019 copyright law of the country. This building was completed in 2008. In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for a certain period of time after the death of the creator (be it the last-surviving architect, engineer, designer, sculptor, engraver, or painter). An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception Commons:Freedom of panorama (FoP). Sadly, Kuwait has no Commons-applicable FoP. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:40, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ✗plicit 13:15, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
1979 publication - IA Metadata publication date issue ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:21, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- There is no notice, and there was no subsequent registration. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 04:24, 17 January 2021 (UTC).
Deleted: per nomination. — Racconish 💬 17:17, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
copyright Nohajack (talk) 00:10, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Just delete Nohajack (talk) 00:15, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- "Just delete" is not a valid reason but... Copyright holder: IVOKARAIVANOV is. Delete. --E4024 (talk) 19:18, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: That "copyright holder" in the Exif data is probably not the original creator / copyright holder of the map either. It looks like a photograph of a printed map. Unclear copyright situation; most likely not the uploader's "own work". --Gestumblindi (talk) 22:55, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
The picture was taken in an exhibit, the original is kept by Nuremberg City Archives, so the file is an illegal (and bad) copy. 193.22.166.88 14:25, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Ah, you think (c) Nazi Germany 1942 ? --Achim (talk) 14:51, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- As I understand the nature of the document, this was directed at forced labourers working within Germany; otherwise, privision no 5 (which says that the labourers from the occupied Sowiet territories have to carry a label saying 'East') would not appear to make much sense. Hence, the relevant country of origin appears to be what is now the Federal Republic of Germany, and I would submit that the depicted text is not eligible for protection under German law at the outset because it does not surpass the threshold of originality for works of speech; consequently, we do not need to go into other issues, such as whether it might possibly be an anonymous or an official work. The German Federal High Court and the courts below require a relatively high degree of originality for at least some types of literary works of a scientific or technical nature (see U Loewenheim and M Leistner, "§ 2" in U Loewenheim, M Leistner, and A Ohly (eds), Schricker/Loewenheim: Urheberrecht (6th edn, Beck 2020) paras 81ff, 104ff). Specifically, courts hold lawyers' letters and user manuals to a rather high bar, requiring such texts to exhibit a "significantly above-average" level of originality (BGH GRUR 1993, 34, 36 – Bedienungsanweisung; GRUR 1986, 739, 740 – Anwaltsschriftsatz; OLG München GRUR 2008, 337, 337 – Presserechtliches Warnschreiben). By way of example, a legal assessment of roughly 3 1/2 pages was considered to be in the public domain by the Berlin Court of Appeals (KG ZUM 2014, 969) due to its lack of individual and original content; see also Landgericht Hamburg ZUM-RD 2017, 496 (denying copyright in a laywer's letter of 1 1/2 pages). I believe that the set of instructions/regulations at hand is of a comparable nature to these types of works and should therefore be assessed against the same standard. In view of the existing jurisprudence, I would posit that the very short leaflet at issue, which merely consists of simplistic instructions, written in standard bureaucratic and legal style, falls short of the requirements that German courts apply with respect to such materials. With that (→ no URAA concern), and because I believe it can be safely assumed that the text in question was not published in compliance with applicable US formalities at the time, the leaflet is also not protected in the US. As to the alleged issue that the "picture was taken in an exhibit", I would point out that we cannot know whether or not that is the case and even if it were the case we cannot know whether the uploader made the photograph with the permission of the property owner (as might be required under German law, see BGH NJW 2011, 749, 750ff – Preußische Gärten und Parkanlagen as interpreted in OLG Stuttgart GRUR 2017, 905 – Reiss-Engelhorn-Museen, paras 93ff; ignored on Wikimedia Commons as a matter of policy, Commons:Non-copyright restrictions). The claim would thus be mere guesswork on a question that this project does not require its users to take into account. Therefore, I suggest to Keep this file and to change the license templates accordingly. — Pajz (talk) 09:24, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: per Pajz. --Gestumblindi (talk) 22:58, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
As uploader, requesting deletion. I just learned these discs are fake/counterfeit. I took and uploaded this image thinking these discs were authentic, but I just got confirmation they are fake. In this case, the entire reason I uploaded this image is no longer valid. The image has no use for educational purpose, and is misleading and could be used maliciously. I am embarrassed and would like the image deleted, please. TarkusAB (talk) 04:35, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Agree that there's no reasonable education purpose so out of COM:SCOPE. -M.nelson (talk) 09:24, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Gestumblindi (talk) 23:21, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Not used and is not administrative region with own bounds. Created by me, Nitobus (talk) 10:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Unused, no reason to disagree with the uploader's request -M.nelson (talk) 21:07, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:35, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Not used and is not administrative region with own bounds. Created by me, Nitobus (talk) 10:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Unused, no reason to disagree with the uploader's request -M.nelson (talk) 21:07, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:35, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
File description page blanked by original uploader; out of scope as unused logo AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 00:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Can be undeleted if provided evidence that this is a real logo of Korean Broadcasting System. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:48, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
File description page blanked by original uploader; assuming to be a request for deletion of unused content. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 00:11, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of COM:SCOPE as we don't know what this is, with no description. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:47, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Metadata consistent with internet image. 1970 date on image, aerial photography. Unlikely own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:29, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete This aerial photo from 1970 is unlikely to be the uploader's own work. -M.nelson (talk) 20:34, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:46, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Metadata is consistent with this image being taken from an online site and not own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:31, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Doesn't seem like the uploader's own work. -M.nelson (talk) 20:37, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:46, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Metadata indicates internet source, unlikely own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:32, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Looks like a professional marketing/promotional photo, unlikely the uploader's own work. Agree that EXIF is suspect. -M.nelson (talk) 20:35, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:46, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in South Africa for "graphic works" in UK A1Cafel (talk) 02:41, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- The photo was taken in London, UK, where the botanical garden was exhibiting - not in South Africa. --Ranveig (talk) 07:50, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Ranveig: the open question is, is this a "2D work of artistic craftsmanship" or not? UK FOP doesn't include graphic arts like murals and posters. Additionally, is this permanent or just temporary? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:52, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Fair question. I guess the photograph does include a somewhat two-dimensional image of Mandela, in addition to all the plants. It's not a permanent display. --Ranveig (talk) 08:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Ranveig: the open question is, is this a "2D work of artistic craftsmanship" or not? UK FOP doesn't include graphic arts like murals and posters. Additionally, is this permanent or just temporary? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:52, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep This kind of mosaic artwork is considered as "works of artistic craftsmanship", which is covered in British FOP rules. --137.189.204.92 14:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Per this IP guy, this is an artistic craftsmanship, so {{FoP-UK}} really applies. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:24, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep since a work of artistic craftsmanship. It's on the same category as woodcarvings, stained glass windows, and land arts. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:10, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete While this likely is a work of artistic craftsmanship per COM:TOO UK, it appears to have been displayed as part of a temporary exhibit rather than permanently displayed. -M.nelson (talk) 09:17, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: Appears to be a temporary installation. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Metadata seems to show internet harvest, size is facebook or smaller - no indications of own work - and a statue. And words on the background stone. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:55, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- I do not know the "internet harvest" part, but the statue and everything else in the image are free to upload per FoP/Turkey. --E4024 (talk) 17:58, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Please see The photo was previously posted on the Internet. Because the copyright owner of the photo is someone else, it must be deleted. Uncitoyen (talk) 18:12, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Incomprehensible nomination with no basis in policy. "Metadata seems to show internet harvest" - no it doesn't, it shows that is was edited through Photoshop. The size is about a thousand pixels high, which is much greater than the frequently cited "delete all the too-small images" policy we don't have.
- There is no evidence that this was sourced from the internet. It was previously posted, agreed, but that's no reason for deletion. The fact the older version was only a third of this size and is watermarked shows that this wasn't derived from that earlier posting, and that's what matters.
- I am no expert on Turkish FoP, but that would seem to be acceptable too. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Heyy Andy, you said something almost positive about one of my DR edits; I note this with joy. Thanks. E4024 (talk) 21:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Andy Dingley: I showed the original version of the photo in my comment. Its original version's size and resolution are larger than on Commons. Fop is free in Turkey, but we can't use someone else's copyrighted photos. Uncitoyen (talk) 21:31, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- If you mean this: http://wowturkey.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5274118 then I see that as http://wowturkey.com/tr708/k_Aydin10_DSCF9535.jpg which is a third of the size here and watermarked, so might be related but it's not a source for this. If you have another location for a source, please tell us. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:03, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Non-members see the small version of the photo. By copyright in Turkey, the copyright owner of the photograph is the photographer. If you look at the contributions of this user, he/she uploads the photos he/she finds on different websites on internet as his own work. A photo that isn't freely licensed can't be on Commons per licensing. Uncitoyen (talk) 22:14, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- The metadata reads in part "Unique ID of original document C695E1DC384751E409201561BF64CFC8 - Date and time of digitizing 00:43, 25 June 2020 - Date metadata was last modified 00:51, 25 June 2020" With a UUID like that, and two matching dates, it is most likely copied from the internet. The image cited at wowturkey has been there since 2015. It is unlikely this image is the own work of the uploader. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
- That makes no sense at all. This might well have been digitized in 2020. But to claim that such a digitization date indicates that it's the same source as an image we can date to 2015??
- It's claimed that the full size and unwatermarked image is somehow available from the 2015 source site. Can this be proven? Andy Dingley (talk) 22:37, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
- There is marble under this statue in the photograph taken in 2015. This photograph on Commons hasn't marble under this statue. Since he/she can't recreate the same photo, he/she took it from this site and edit and cut it in the photoshop. If you want, can sign to the site and see the larger version of the photo. You can also analyze the user's deleted files on 10 December. [3] Uncitoyen (talk) 08:55, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Given the uploader's history, it appears more likely than not to be a copyvio. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:56, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Downscaled reupload of several already existing files. But with a misleading title - the flag has no known affliation to any historic or currently existing (neo-)nazi grouping in Estonia. No file description that could explain otherwise. Author's previous posts have an anti-West propaganda sentiment. 212.225.218.214 18:00, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Unused and out of scope. No educational use; appears to be pushing some kind of political point. -M.nelson (talk) 21:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Author requests deletion. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 18:22, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- pse, User:CAPTAIN RAJU?
- this is the only picture we have of the international bus station. --Albinfo (talk) 15:24, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
file moved to File:Tirana International Bus Station in 2020.03.jpg.CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:19, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete the RD. --E4024 (talk) 19:55, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Unused and redundant, no reason to argue with uploader's request. -M.nelson (talk) 21:17, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: Unnecessary redirect. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:58, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Обложка журнала принадлежит редакции и её штатным фотографам, разрешения нет. Dogad75 (talk) 22:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Фотография несомненно важна для статьи в русской Википедии,посвященной Илья Заславскому,характеризует его участие в противостоянии с ГКЧП .
Я уже неоднократно высказывался на тему об этой фотографии.Речь о снимке обложки,а не об обложке.Журнала давно не существует в том числе как юрлица.Членом его коллегии был Заславский.Обложки книг особая статья.В тех случаях,когда именно данная обложка тесна связана с содержанием книги,когда это обложка первого изжания например,Википедия как правило разрешает поместить фото обложки в статью.Здесь речь идет об обложке журнала,в котором помещена статья Заславского. Я за то,чтобы сохранить фотографию.Статья и так изуроводана ботами,выбросившими практически весь фотоархив бывшего депутата.Причем причины по которым фотографии выброшены зачастую непонятны никому кроме ботов. Почему исчезла важная фотография Заславского с Войновичем,иллюстрирующая тезис о его действиях по возвращению советского гражданства писателям-изгнанникам?Исчезновение фотографии обложки Столицы опять нанесет вред смысловому содержанию статьи.А какие претензии и от кого могут быть к фотографии обложки? От давно ликвидированного журнала? К чему претензия? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2a02:8109:b5c0:53dc:7869:7453:d4d5:67e0 (talk) 00:47, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Magazine seems to be published in 1991, presumably copyrighted. Local Wikipedias might allow Fair Use but it isn't allowed here on Commons (COM:Fair Use). -M.nelson (talk) 21:23, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:59, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by BowenLarsen (talk · contribs)
[edit]These images appear to show the installation of and finished installation image of a sculpture called "the Lilly at Fountain Lake" Arizona. On the internet, "About Fountain Lake" has the following description: "The fountain was built in 1970 by Robert McCulloch the year before reconstruction of the London Bridge in Lake Havasu City, another of McCulloch's projects. The fountain sprays water for about fifteen minutes every hour at the top of the hour. The plume rises from a concrete water lily sculpture in the center of a large man-made lake." I think since the piece is described as a "concrete water lily sculpture" and that it was designed by Robert McCulloch, that retaining the images requires COM:OTRS permission from the artist. Also the older image would date from 1970 and we would also need permission from that original photographer. The recent aerial view seems to be from Facebook, and and additional COM:OTRS from its actual photographer is needed.
Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:36, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete No COM:FOP US, also looks like invalid claim of Own Work with the original photographer(s) not credited. I do wonder if the sculptor is actually Robert McCulloch or if he just managed the project; he sounds like more of a businessman than artist. -M.nelson (talk) 09:23, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Robert McCulloch was the developer of the project, definitely not the photographer. The photographer is unknown since it was taken so long ago. All the photos used and submitted were either taken by me (BowenLarsen) or are part of an archive of photos supplied by the Town of Fountain Hills. If the Town provides the photos that they paid for, do I add the photographer's name if known?
Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by BowenLarsen (talk • contribs) 19:22, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: The fountain may be {{PD-US-no notice}} if there is no visible notice on the work, but we can't keep photos with unknown photographers. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:51, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by BowenLarsen (talk · contribs)
[edit]Professional-looking photos from a wide range of cameras all labeled as own work. I suspect the uploader might have permission from the photographers to upload them, but we need that permission from each photographer through COM:OTRS.
- File:2020 Arts-Crafts Fair in Fountain Hills.jpg
- File:Make a Difference Day in Fountain HIlls.jpg
- File:Veterans Day.jpg
- File:Santa and Bshift Stroll 2020.jpg
- File:Fountain park St Pats.jpg
- File:TURKETY TROT 2020 (61).jpg
- File:2020 Arts-Crafts Fair (81).jpg
- File:FOUNTAIN LIGHTS 12-15 (25).jpg
- File:FOUNTAIN LIGHTS 12-15 (26).jpg
- File:FOUNTAIN LIGHTS 12-15 (22).jpg
- File:FOUNTAIN LIGHTS 12-15 (23).jpg
- File:FOUNTAIN LIGHTS 12-15 (19).jpg
- File:Adero resort from ridgeline trail.jpg
- File:Coming through the flowers.jpg
- File:Adero Canyon snow on cactus.jpg
- File:Adero snow.jpg
- File:Ridgeline Trail.jpg
- File:2020 Arts-Crafts Fair .jpg
- File:TURKETY TROT 2020 (202).jpg
- File:Town Center walk.jpg
- File:Running on open roads in Fountain Hills.jpg
- File:Frisbee catch with dog at Fountain Park.jpg
- File:Bales Elementary School.jpg
- File:WestPark Elementary School.jpg
- File:Marionneaux Elementary School.jpg
- File:Sundance Elementary School.jpg
- File:Jasinski Elementary School.jpg
- File:Inca Elementary School.jpg
- File:Original BES - 1899.jpg
- File:Buckeye Elementary entrance (8).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
-M.nelson (talk) 20:45, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you, but the majority of these photos I took. Some are from an archive the Town has. The photographer was hired by the Town and paid for the usage. Can the name of the photographer be added to allow for the use on the Commons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BowenLarsen (talk • contribs) 19:24, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
@BowenLarsen: No, you cannot just add someone else's name to their photos, you need their permission from COM:OTRS. Archive photos also require COM:OTRS from original authors. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
- Comment @BowenLarsen: Please state what camera models you shoot with personally. Include all types of cameras including smartphones, point-and-shoots, DSLRs, etc. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:53, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, OTRS validation needed. — Racconish 💬 13:20, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Statuary without COM:OTRS permission from the sculptor. Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:33, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete No COM:FOP US for sculptures. -M.nelson (talk) 20:25, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and COM:FOP US. I could not find info on the age of the sculpture, it looks rather recent. --Elly (talk) 16:00, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Presenting this data as an image v.s. a table doesn't seem useful, it's dated, etc. LFaraone 05:02, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- It seems readable to me. If it's dated, move it to a dated title (e.g., "US Vaccination Schedule as of 2016"), as a record of what the schedule looked like at that time. Overall, it is useful for demonstrating what a vaccination schedule looks like. BD2412 T 21:48, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Can somebody come and close this already? BD2412 T 04:42, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
- Keep per COM:INUSE -M.nelson (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, was used on the projects before, is of historical value now. --Elly (talk) 06:35, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This artist is not Aline de Lima Outilmail (talk) 05:58, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination of th uploader. Courtesy deletion, albeit late, image not in use. --Elly (talk) 06:38, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Completely duplicated. Ten-nen 06:11, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Neutral A close but not exact duplicate of File:Mitsubishi Pajero Mini 235.JPG. It doesn't hurt to keep photos from slightly different angles, but it also doesn't hurt to accept the uploader's wish to delete it. whym (talk) 11:13, 3 May 2021 (UTC)- Delete Not in use, fairly redundant - no reason to disagree with the uploader's request. -M.nelson (talk) 21:05, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Courtesy deletion, albeit late, image not in use. --Elly (talk) 06:39, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Smooth O as duplicate (Duplicate) and the most recent rationale was: Flag of Bosnia and Herzegovina (1992–1998).svg
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion per Commons:Deletion_policy#Duplicates. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:36, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Comment In that case, this file should be deleted since it's not own work, because file is taken from this source, as it can be seen in file name. --Smooth O (talk) 12:03, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and discussion. This is not a duplicate, but it can be considered redundant per Com:Redundant, because highly similar versions exists in Category:Flag of Bosnia and Herzegovina (1992–1998). --Elly (talk) 06:48, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
Je me suis trompée dans les manipulations de Wikipédia. Cette image ne m’appartient pas. Margaux.HDI2.2020 (talk) 08:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Mauvaise manipulation, je ne voulais pas faire de demande de suppression. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Margaux.HDI2.2020 (talk • contribs) 08:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Erreurs de manipulations. Ce fichier ne m’appartient pas. Je n’en ai pas les droits. Margaux.HDI2.2020 (talk) 08:33, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Erreurs de manipulations. Ce fichier ne m’appartient pas. Je n’en ai pas les droits. Margaux.HDI2.2020 (talk) 08:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
{{copyvio|1=raison}} Margaux.HDI2.2020 (talk) 08:51, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Unused, per uploader request -M.nelson (talk) 21:23, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and comment. Uploader request, probably copyvio. --Elly (talk) 06:50, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Date of first publication of the picture is unknown (referred Dictionary was published in 1987-1988, less than 70 years ago). Maxinvestigator (talk) 08:43, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination and per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Russia. The subject, as described on Russian Wikipedia died in 1943. The photographer is unknown. Therefore the image is with sufficient certainty in PD 120 years after 1943, and can be undeleted in 1943+120=2063. . --Elly (talk) 11:16, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
File:Roots and causes that created the PKK terrorist organization (IA rootsndcausestha1094537625).pdf
[edit]Author is not US military (Affiliation: Turkish Army) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:35, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- The Web-site disagrees; this is, apparently, in the public domain. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 04:09, 17 January 2021 (UTC).
- Keep per TE(æ)A,ea. -M.nelson (talk) 21:12, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Referenced website states "This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States.". --Elly (talk) 12:29, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
Nepravilna slika za izbrano temo. 2A00:EE2:1208:F100:94E6:69C3:169A:1F6E 12:50, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
S predlogom za brisanje se popolnoma strinjam. --5rakuhar (talk) 06:47, 11 December 2020 (UTC)5rakuhar
Deleted: book cover from 1981 according to https://sl.wikiversity.org/wiki/Pet_fragmentov . Therefore copyrighted image which must be deleted if we do not receive permission of the designer or publiser. --Elly (talk) 12:36, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Palosirkka as duplicate (dup) and the most recent rationale was: File:Travelminit.svg
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion per Commons:Deletion_policy#Duplicates. -- Túrelio (talk) 13:07, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and discussion. Both images were uploaded by the same user. This image is not in use and considerd Com:redundant. --Elly (talk) 12:39, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
This seal device has been mistakenly colored and incorrectly presented as an actual historical coat of arms, thus creating confusion and spreading misinformation. Dughorm (talk) 16:59, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Support (if it is really inaccurate) as this nomination of deletion was created by the ethnic Ukrainian (based on his userpage), therefore I have no doubts that he might have really spotted inaccuraccy or (and) original research. However, the opinion of more Ukrainians about this file is really necessary before taking any actions. I informed the WikiProject Ukraine participants about this nomination here. -- Pofka (talk) 18:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- It Depends. It is billed as a reconstruction (maybe the point should be made clearer), so some interpretation is assumed. Every drawn image, captured photograph, or written article has some interpretation in its execution, and that is not necessarily original research. Sorry I haven’t read the sources in detail or done more research yet, but a couple questions spring to mind. 1) What’s the evidence it is mistakenly coloured? Are the colours based on other related devices or a description in a source? If so, then I think it can be acceptable. Can it be improved instead of deleting? 2) The central image is based on a seal from a source. That is fine. Is the existence or likely existence of a coat of arms on a shield-shaped background based on a reliable source? If so, I think it can be acceptable. If not, maybe it can be edited for an improved reconstruction of the seal. —Michael Z. 2021-05-18 20:12 z 20:12, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
- Illiterate interpretation. In heraldry, such a combination of colors was not used (blue flag on a blue background). The background should probably be red and the flag white. See for example the coat of arms of the Galicia-Vladimir land. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 09:09, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- It is possible that under the feet of the horse is not grass, but a dragon. See the seal of the city of Vladimir in 1324. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 09:16, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, see Commons:Deletion policy. @Dughorm: you could rename the image to show that it has not the correct historical properties. The file is in use on 4 pages in Uk. Wikipedia. --Elly (talk) 13:48, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Seems to be a trial of File:Lincoln Island (SVG file).svg Sémhur (talk) 20:07, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
- Delete Unused, made redundant by File:Lincoln Island (SVG file).svg which has improved borders. -M.nelson (talk) 21:26, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination and comment. --Elly (talk) 13:52, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Listed at [4] as copyrighted to another person.BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 18:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
not from my camera but file shared between phones and already requested an admin to check any copyright violation and be deleted when I get the first copyright warning,he leave it Luwanglinux (talk) 04:57, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep The image is a copy/reproduction of an ancient text/artwork which is certainly in the public domain. Per COM:DW, "subsequent works based on another, previous work but lacking substantial new creative content are merely considered copies of that work and are entitled to no new copyright protection as a result". The image should be tagged as PD rather than Own Work. -M.nelson (talk) 09:28, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Luwanglinux: could you indicate the (approx.) age of this manuscript, preferably with a source? Elly (talk) 06:31, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
- @M.nelson: Ok I tagged it as my own when I was too ignorant about wikipedia rules, Is Pd-art suitable with this file? regards Luwanglinux (talk) 05:14, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
- @Ellywa: This manuscript is claimed to be old as 1400 BCE, the age of this manuscript is known from the content written inside a puya called "Wakoklon Heelel Thillel Salai Ama Ilon Pukok" the interesting part is in the beginning of this puya it is mention it was copied from the original one in the early part of 18th century and indicate the original age of the puya as a story (narrated by Maichou(scholar) Apoi Nana in front of king Mungyampa) of the time of Leisanglel Asang Ngasapa and maichou Chakpalam Macha wrote... many other puyas exist like the Kings chronicle en:Cheitharol Kumbaba which again dates back to 1st century AD, but I should let every reader know this Puya is a vast ocean of knowledge stories of forefathers (may be historical),myth folktales,just like ancient greek consider math as their God puya indicate the Meitei numeral ꯱ (one) as the form of God every other character of this manuscript is related with a mythological story and the manuscript as a fact is taken from human body part shapes and structure, I hope this helps Luwanglinux (talk) 05:14, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, document in PD. @Luwanglinux: thank you for your extended explanation. I changed the licencing, added categories, also uploaded a version with larger resolutioin. --Elly (talk) 08:00, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Contributions and Submissions to a conference are not necessrily wokrs of US Gov ? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:05, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- The collection is considered a work of the U.S. government, as are any articles written by government officials. I would claim that all contributions to this conference could be considered works of the U.S. government, depending on the manner in which this conference was organized, but that is a point of debate. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 04:31, 17 January 2021 (UTC).
Kept: I would agree with TE(æ)A,ea: seems to be a collection of specific materials for the conference, issued by a GOV agency. The introduction part says that it includes mostly task committee reports and some appendices, so, materials created for the conference or by government employees. --rubin16 (talk) 12:46, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
1972 publication, was this renewed ? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:11, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- This work would have its copyright renewed automatically. There is no evident notice, but the work was registered. It appears that most of the volumes of this work were registered, and thus must be subject to deletion. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 04:27, 17 January 2021 (UTC).
- Delete, likely copyrighted per TE(æ)A,ea. -M.nelson (talk) 09:21, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --rubin16 (talk) 12:47, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
File:Workshop on standardization needs in biotechnology - Gaithersburg, Md - April 26-27, 1993 (IA jresv99n1p93).pdf
[edit]Contans portions contributed by a third party non federal employee ( Affiliation : ASTM) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:31, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- I would presume the material of the workshop itself to be a work of the Institute; thus, this report, if it merely derived from the workshop, would be a work of the U.S. government. I am not certain as to that second item, however. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 04:17, 17 January 2021 (UTC).
Deleted: As both sides are equally credited in the beginning of the article, I think that we can't be safe to state that it's a full government work. --rubin16 (talk) 12:53, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
File:Kosovo - the end of the beginning, or the beginning of the end?- effects of the Kosovo war on NATO's viability, U.S. commitments to NATO, European Defense cooperation? (IA kosovoendofbegin109459364).pdf
[edit]Work seemingly by non US military (Affiliation: Hungarian Army) ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:34, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- Per this, it is likely that work is in the public domain. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 04:14, 17 January 2021 (UTC).
Kept: per discussion. --rubin16 (talk) 13:01, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
This appears to have been authored by MIT, Contractor works are not necessarily 'federal' works for copyright purposes. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 17:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- This work claims to be written by an agency of the U.S. government, and I believe that it would qualify as such a work. I think the copyright notice is acceptable, anyhow. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 04:04, 17 January 2021 (UTC).
Deleted: copyright notice by MIT. --rubin16 (talk) 13:03, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Unsure of the exact rule here, but this might not be covered under PD-USGov. It's a brief prepared by the government of the state of Texas and submitted to the Supreme Court; it seems the copyright would be owned by the state of Texas. File:Amicus curiae from 17 states, Texas v. Pennsylvania 2020.pdf is the same scenario, but substitute Texas for Missouri. Mcrsftdog (talk) 17:58, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- The document was authored by Texas but published by SCOTUS: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22O155/163048/20201208132827887_TX-v-State-ExpedMot%202020-12-07%20FINAL.pdf.
- The other doc was also published by SCOTUS. Soibangla (talk) 19:37, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
- According to the template, the work must be “prepared” by a U. S. government member—in this case, Texas would have prepared the brief. It is the same case for the Missouri Amici filing; and I believe it is also the same for Donald Trump’s request for intervention, which was, according to the document, filed “in his personal capacity as candidate for re-election,” and not “as part of [the President’s] official duties,” as the template notes. These filings are interesting, but I think the states hold the copyright. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 01:27, 11 December 2020 (UTC).
- The briefs at issue are functional presentations of fact and law, and are not subject to copyright. You can get all the legal briefs you want on PACER. Comfr (talk) 04:23, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
- The fact that they are “functional presentations of fact and law” doesn’t matter, as that is not the standard for copyright: it is “original work of authorship” (17 U.S.C. § 102). That what is not copyrightable is much narrower than you claim is evident by U.S. Copyright Office Circular 33, “Works Not Protected by Copyright,” which does not mention “functional presentations” as a group inherently ineligible for copyright. The Compendium (3rd ed.) confirms this in reference to “creativity” (section 308.2) and “works that do not satisfy the originality requirement” (section 313.4); while some legal filings, like certificates of word count, would fail to be original, full-length legal briefs, and especially amicus briefs, would not fail that standard. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 12:39, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
- All legal filings with the Supreme Court are public domain unless ordered sealed by a judge or court. If ordered sealed, the document wouldn't be available for public viewing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.40.243 (talk • contribs)
- No, they’re not. Legal filings are public record, not public domain. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 12:39, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: not a work of the federal government. --rubin16 (talk) 13:10, 17 September 2021 (UTC)