Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2021/02/06
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
delete photo 1 Vu-0001 (talk) 03:40, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
JNR_C5520.jpg Vu-0001 (talk) 09:03, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
- Please do not open repetitive DRs on a same file; the discussions take several days. Just sit back and wait. --E4024 (talk) 02:08, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
JNR C5520.jpg Vu-0001 (talk) 02:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
JNR C5520.jpg Vu-0001 (talk) 02:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
JNR C5520.jpg Vu-0001 (talk) 02:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
JNR C5520.jpg Vu-0001 (talk) 02:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: courtesy deletion of unused photo, likely not own work anyway. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:47, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Source Own work - false information or flag is not official / appropriating someone else's image O revolucionário aliado (talk) 06:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --rubin16 (talk) 10:50, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
User:Aryashahnaughty sockpuppet. Has been deleted on Commons before (e.g. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Shah Arya.jpg) Eostrix (talk) 10:07, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deleted per COM:CSD#G4/G10/F10. -- CptViraj (talk) 11:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
No exif info. Seems not uploader's own work. (｀・ω・´) (talk) 02:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Speedy-deleted (non-admin closure). Elliot321 (talk) 15:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by AntiCompositeBot as no license (User:AntiCompositeBot/NoLicense/tag) Zinneke (talk) 10:15, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Keep: this is an extract from openstreetmap, which are licenced CC BY 20, hence compatible with Wikmedia Commons criteria. --Zinneke (talk) 10:16, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 18:08, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
It just should 27.32.149.222 05:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: Vandalism. --Achim (talk) 21:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
{{speedydelete|Es una clara violación de derechos de autor.}} Luis fragar (talk) 20:51, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 21:50, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
copyrighted material Journey mini (talk) 15:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
“{{db-g7 }}” Prosenjit bhuniya (talk) 16:55, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Speedy delete per nom. E4024 (talk) 17:05, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted (non-sysop closed): Delete by Túrelio. --(｀・ω・´) (talk) 09:05, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Along with all other files uploaded by the user, which are:
- File:Anup-Rajput.jpg
- File:Anup--Rajput.jpg
- File:Anup Rajput 7309460788.jpg
- File:Anup Rajput , 6386001209.jpg
- File:Raj Rajput.jpg
- File:Anup Rajjj +91 6386001209.jpg
- File:Anup Kumar Rajput.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pahunkat (talk • contribs) 20:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
CSD F10 - all files uploaded by this user are selfies Pahunkat (talk) 20:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted (non-sysop closed): Delete by Christian Ferrer. --(｀・ω・´) (talk) 09:10, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Apparently the Ghetto Fighter's House claims copyright on this image. (The artist's death year isn't known for certain, though he is widely presumed to have died in or before 1945.) Botterweg14 (talk) 22:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- This is a doubtful copyright claim. Did the Ghetto Fighter's House sent a notice to Wikimedia? Can you provide a OTRS-ticketnumber? Otherwise Keep as Joseph Richter died during the war according to the website Sobobor Interviews, a project of Nederlands Instituut voor Oorlogsdocumentatie (NIOD). https://www.sobiborinterviews.nl/nl/schetsen-van-sobibor/josephrichter --Hannolans (talk) 22:22, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep No proof of copyright claim; most likely Richter's copyright ended in 2015. Vysotsky (talk) 23:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept (non-sysop closed): No valid reason for deletion. See above. --(｀・ω・´) (talk) 09:09, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Mody-yemen (talk) 16:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 11:47, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Mody-yemen (talk) 18:59, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 11:47, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Very possibly not an own work. The blocked user was uploading many files like this. E4024 (talk) 03:45, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Rubin16 at 10:41, 7 Februar 2021 UTC: Source of derivative work not specified since 30 January 2021 --Krdbot 15:39, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Very possibly not an own work. The blocked user was uploading many files like this. E4024 (talk) 03:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Rubin16 at 10:40, 7 Februar 2021 UTC: Source of derivative work not specified since 30 January 2021 --Krdbot 15:39, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Very possibly not an own work. The blocked user was uploading many files like this. E4024 (talk) 03:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Rubin16 at 10:41, 7 Februar 2021 UTC: Source of derivative work not specified since 30 January 2021 --Krdbot 15:39, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
personal use and troll image Hoseina051311 (talk) 14:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 18:37, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
personal use and troll image Hoseina051311 (talk) 14:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 18:37, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
personal use and troll image Hoseina051311 (talk) 14:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 18:36, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
personal use and troll image Hoseina051311 (talk) 14:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 18:35, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
personal use and troll image Hoseina051311 (talk) 14:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 18:36, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:San Diego, Oct. 2016 04.jpg, uploaded using the mobile app Another Believer (talk) 18:32, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: and redirected. --JuTa 23:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Please be able to delete the file I uploaded, thanks in advance. OktaRama2010 (talk) 11:05, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Taivo at 19:25, 8 Februar 2021 UTC: Derivative work of non-free content (F3): no freedom of panorama in source country --Krdbot 06:52, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Other than being a dubious own work, neither the description nor the cats (or the lack of them) help us put the image in context. Therefore I see it also OoS. My imagination says: Christ visits a young boy in hospital: "Stand up, youngster and walk..." E4024 (talk) 00:07, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Delete no clear education use. Elliot321 (talk) 15:16, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:40, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Not an own work as declared. Please see the watermark. Is it free to upload from that site? E4024 (talk) 00:12, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete improper license, no clear education use. Elliot321 (talk) 15:16, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
spammy, useless, out of scope Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 00:18, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete out of scope. Elliot321 (talk) 15:16, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
I made a svg file of this map already and Ontario County is not right on this map. TylerKutschbach (talk) 00:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete apparently redundant. Elliot321 (talk) 15:18, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Unused logo, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 01:11, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete out of scope. Elliot321 (talk) 15:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
File:Preparing-calendar-new-year-old-woman-arranging-pages-few-days-street-recto-manila-philippines-36186666.jpg
[edit]Not own work: many versions found online. P 1 9 9 ✉ 01:22, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete apparent copyvio, out of scope. Elliot321 (talk) 15:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope. Only used on userpage of user without any meaningful edits. P 1 9 9 ✉ 01:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete out of scope. Elliot321 (talk) 15:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Very possibly not an own work. The user is uploading many files like this. E4024 (talk) 02:50, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete likely a copyvio, unless more info is provided. Elliot321 (talk) 15:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Not an own work; one of many similar uploads by a now blocked disruptive user. E4024 (talk) 03:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete possible copyvio, likely out of scope. Elliot321 (talk) 15:33, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Very possibly not an own work. The blocked user was uploading many files like this. E4024 (talk) 03:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Vandalism Programmateur01 (talk) 03:38, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy delete. Would have qualified for speedy deletion under G3. Content intended as vandalism, threat, or attack. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per nom. —hueman1 (talk • uploads) 01:06, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
No META data showing that the uploader is the copyright holder. Furthermore, unknown person with no use for the picture. Pierre cb (talk) 04:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Very possibly not an own work, per lack of EXIF and other images of the ambassador in several countries. I doubt the uploader was following them everywhere with a camera at hand. E4024 (talk) 04:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Screenshot from television, copyrighted unless there is evidence otherwise. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 07:43, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:43, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
https://extra.globo.com/mulher/corpo/eline-porto-entra-em-sete-vidas-diz-que-mantem-forma-com-treino-funcional-16174326.html Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 07:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Unused logo, no educational value, out of scope. Sakhalinio (talk) 10:08, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:43, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Unused collection of screenshots with very unclear description. No educational value.. Malcolma (talk) 11:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:43, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Unused photo. Blurred picture of unidentified people. Purpose unclear. Out of scope. Malcolma (talk) 11:12, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:43, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Unused photo of unidentified artwork. No educational value. Malcolma (talk) 11:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:43, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Commons is not your personal free web host. Lack of COM:EDUSE, looks like homework sharing or the like.No contributions to any wm project.
Achim (talk) 11:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Abdullahi2021 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused photos,they were in use on Wikidata, but the item there was deleted as not notable
- File:Shawn stage hand mic.jpg
- File:Shawn smiles.jpg
- File:Shawn sitting fav.jpg
- File:Shawn sitting slide.jpg
- File:Shawn blue.jpg
- File:Shawn Black hands together.jpg
- File:Shawn headshot.jpg
Mbch331 (talk) 11:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
It looks as if it might have been taken from a newspaper, so the licence might be wrong. Stefan4 (talk) 15:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- Comment: Licence is the same licence given by the original uploader when the image was uploaded in 2006 on the English Wikipedia here. Osarius (talk) 15:59, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, but that licence statement is likely wrong. If you look at the uploader's talk page at English Wikipedia, you see that the uploader has got all of his other uploads deleted because of copyright reasons. en:Special:ListFiles/Sunil ns nair tells that all of his files have been either deleted or overwritten. --Stefan4 (talk) 16:08, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
- Delete - this seems to be a 2005 photo from a print publication. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:39, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 16:58, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 07:24, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Ts12rAc (talk) 11:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy delete - F10 and/or G10. Used on userpage of a user who registered to make personal promotion. Is this also a "deleted file re-uploaded" case? If not, this time he took even Gandhi behind to save his OoS pic, but IMHO in vain. --E4024 (talk) 12:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Again... Osarius (talk) 15:01, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. I should note that these are five different images that have had this name and been deleted. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 17:12, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
copyright violation Mike Peel (talk) 12:29, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Private content. Out of scope. GeorgHH • talk 13:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:45, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
clearly flickrwashed, no exif data, not a selfie and uploaded by the subject Praxidicae (talk) 14:11, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:45, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
no evidence that the uploader on flickr is the owner of the image and as with other uploads from that flickr account, there appears to be a lot of flickrwashing Praxidicae (talk) 14:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:45, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
very small unused private image, no educational value → out of scope. Jahobr (talk) 15:02, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:45, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Die Beschreibung (Autor und Quelle) aller in dieser Datei eingebundenen Fotos/Dokumente kann nicht vollständig gegeben werden bzw. wird durch WikiCommons nicht anerkannt. Rena Cori (talk) 15:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Aus meiner Autoren-Sicht Rena Cori (talk) kann die Datei sofort gelöscht werden, da der ursprüngliche Zweck, nämlich zum Nachweis der Aussagen im zugehörigen Wikipedia-Artikel „Annemarie Siemank“ nicht (mehr) gegeben ist. --Rena Cori (talk) 15:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: done by Rubin16. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:45, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Die Beschreibung (Autor und Quelle) aller in dieser Datei eingebundenen Fotos/Dokumente kann nicht vollständig gegeben werden bzw. wird durch WikiCommons nicht anerkannt. Rena Cori (talk) 15:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Aus meiner Autoren-Sicht Rena Cori (talk) kann die Datei sofort gelöscht werden, da der ursprüngliche Zweck, nämlich zum Nachweis der Aussagen im zugehörigen Wikipedia-Artikel „Annemarie Siemank“ nicht (mehr) gegeben ist. --Rena Cori (talk) 15:51, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: done by Rubin16. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:46, 13 February 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) 16:15, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
File:SILENT VS ORAL READING - IMPACTS ON THE READING COMPREHENSION AMONG SELECTED SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS.pdf
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:15, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Cristian Furiati Monterrubio (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images.
- File:LA CULTURA AZTECA SU ESPECIALIZACIÓN LABORAL Y COMPLEJIDAD TECNOLÓGICA.pdf
- File:ANÁLISIS DE INFORMACIÓN DE LOS AZTECAS.pdf
- File:ANÁLISIS DE INFORMACIÓN UCA.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:18, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Apparent COM:NETCOPYVIO - low res, no EXIF, all user uploads copyvios of this subject, appears consistent with sets found on subject's social media, etc. Duck/COM:PRP issue. Эlcobbola talk 16:18, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused document about company of questionable notability. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:19, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:46, 13 February 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) 16:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:46, 13 February 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) 16:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Adarsh janta party (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:37, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:38, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:43, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:45, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from mascot. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:50, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:47, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:51, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:48, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Watermark implies this is not an own work. E4024 (talk) 17:02, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete speedy deletion Db-g7 Prosenjit bhuniya (talk) 04:08, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:48, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
unused personal photo, sole upload. Pibwl (talk) 18:07, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:48, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Justin Cyriac (talk · contribs)
[edit]Commons is not the personal free web host for youtubers. No contributions to any wm project, all edits on en:wp deleted.
- File:"Justin Cyriac - Aug 2019.jpg".png
- File:1 gVm4vEPkS9LItgAwIwdDew.png
- File:MRfox (2).png
- File:"Justin Cyriac - May 2019.jpg".png
- File:"Justin Cyriac - April 2019.jpg".png
Achim (talk) 21:12, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:49, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
used for promotion at wikidatawiki, not sure if enough for PD logo, but if not, also a possible CV Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:50, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:49, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Unused private gif, no educational value → out of scope. Jahobr (talk) 22:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:49, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Unused private artwork, no educational value → out of scope. Jahobr (talk) 23:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete out of scope. Elliot321 (talk) 04:36, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:49, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Unused private gif, no educational value → out of scope. Jahobr (talk) 23:50, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete out of scope. Elliot321 (talk) 04:36, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:49, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Unused private image, no educational value → out of scope. Jahobr (talk) 23:50, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete out of scope. Elliot321 (talk) 04:36, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:49, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
No educational value. Not a real station's logo. Only purpose was for use in a hoax article on Wikipedia. Tdl1060 (talk) 23:51, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete out of scope. Elliot321 (talk) 04:35, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:49, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Reupload of logo previously deleted per this discussion. No educational value. Not a real station's logo. Only purpose for this, and the original upload was for use in a hoax article on Wikipedia. User is sockpuppet, blocked on Wikipedia for hoaxes of this kind. Tdl1060 (talk) 18:05, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 14:12, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Guinée pop (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work. Most uploads from this user on similar subjects taken from City-info.ma
- File:Crystal Casablanca.jpg
- File:Turquoise 1 Casablanca.jpg
- File:Anafe.jpg
- File:121 Boulevard Hassan 2.jpg
- File:Barcelo Casablanca.jpg
- File:Anfa Sky.jpg
- File:CIH 1.jpg
- File:Hotel Ibnou Anfa.jpg
- File:Tour Végetal 1.jpg
- File:Tour Végetal.jpg
- File:BMCI Casablanca.jpg
- File:30 rue sidi belyout building.jpg
— Racconish 💬 08:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:01, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Katandisje (talk · contribs)
[edit]Modern art and promo photo. I think artist identity/permission confirmation via Commons:OTRS is necessary.
- File:Mallëngjim Nostalgia Nostalgie.jpg
- File:Hija e një portreti II Der Schatten eines Portraits II Portrait Shadow II (53x53 cm).jpg
- File:Portret i Harruar Forgotten Portrait (150x140).jpg
- File:Gjysmë harku Halbbogen Semi Circle (75x105 cm).png
- File:E zezë dhe blu Schwarz und blau Black and Blue ( 110x53 cm).jpg
- File:Sofra Ilire Illyrisches Eßtisch Illyrian Eating Table (105x70 cm).webp
- File:Forma II Form Forma II (140x40 cm).jpg
- File:Nga cikli Lajmëtari i Kohës From the cycle Time Messenger.jpg
- File:Nga cikli Ëndëra Futuriste From the cycle Futuristic Dreams.jpg
- File:Nga cikli Midis Realitetit dhe Abstrakcionit From the cycle Between Reality and Abstraction.jpg
- File:Hingëllima Whining Jammern.jpg
- File:Gani Gashi.jpg
- File:Pika e kuqe Der rote Punkt Red Point (15x18 cm).png
- File:Mozaik i kaltër Blauer Mosaik Blue Mosaic (50x70 cm).png
- File:Kompozicion Komposition Composition (50x70 cm).png
- File:Kështjella II Das Schloss II Castle (140x140 cm).webp
- File:Figurë ilire II Illyrische Figur II lyrian Figure (100x100 cm).webp
- File:Formimi i hijes Shadow Formation Schattenbildung (150X150 cm).webp
- File:Protesta The Protest Der Protest (150x150cm).webp
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Do not dare to delete them, why did you nominate them for deletion, is there a reason? I am recommending you do not delete them if they need to be processed, processed but not deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 46.99.8.216 (talk) 14:46, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Low-quality chemical structure with opaque (white) areas located around each atom group. Have File:N,N-Diethylmethylamine-2D-structure.svg as high-quality alternative in ACS format. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 21:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:07, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
F3. Derivative work of non-free content [1] C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 08:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete obvious copyright violation. Screenshot of a music video. HĐ (talk) 14:41, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. If a COM:OTRS permission is send to we can undelete. --MGA73 (talk) 10:46, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Poor quality, replaced by File:1-Hexadecene Structural Formula V1.svg. Leyo 21:04, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. The opaque (grey) background is another quality issue; copied from uncited source. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 21:47, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:16, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Out of scope, no meaningful description, lacking location information. Till (talk) 16:55, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:40, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Picture so blurry it is impossible to see who it is. Out of COM:SCOPE as it has no educational use. Myloufa (talk) 17:02, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete So poor as to fail COM:SCOPE. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:45, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:39, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Copyright violation S0091 (talk) 20:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; per watermark and lack of exif. PCP. --Gbawden (talk) 09:39, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
unlikely to be own work
- File:Pipeline Construction .jpg
- File:I-70 Terminus.jpg
- File:Tree canopy in Gwynns Falls-Leakin Park.jpg
Didym (talk) 20:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
The Tree Canopy photo was taken by Bridget McCusker, President of Friends of Gwynns Falls/Leakin Park. The other two are stills from a video that I produced (along with others) and which was filmed by John Dean and edited by Penny Forester. Please tell me what what additional documentation you may need. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.121.222.174 (talk) 21:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC) 71.121.222.174 21:14, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
71.121.222.174 21:15, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
I am sorry I wasn't more careful about this. The video is "copyright 2020 Friends of Gwynns Falls/Leakin Park", and perhaps Bridget's still photo could be so copyrighted as well, but I am not sure there is a need to do so. Willcook3
71.121.222.174 22:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
I havre deleted the photos because I don't understand the proper way to handle the copyright issues. It's probably just as well. 71.121.222.174 12:29, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:39, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Out of scope - Can't see how or where this could ever be used, YThanks, –Davey2010Talk 23:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete out of scope. Elliot321 (talk) 04:39, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:37, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
One file (Mall of Asia Arena) was deleted in 2016 because: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Mall of Asia Arena. Therefore, the entire montage has been compromised, per COM:Derivative works. Undelete when FOP is introduced here. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Additionally, two other images (the SM Mall of Asia and the Two E-Com Prism Plaza) are also no FOP violations and under deletion requests: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:SM Mall of Asia and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Two E-Com Prism Plaza.JPG. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:02, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 04:50, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
While all files here are freely-licensed sourced from images here and the actual montage has no copyright issues, one of the images have been deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Bank of the Philippine Islands on Ayala Avenue, Makati (as far as per my memories way back August-Sept. 2015, when it was still existing), because there is no FOP in the Philippines. Thereby this COM:DW (a collage) is compromised. Undelete when either FOP is introduced here or if the building's architectural copyright expires. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:53, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Derivative work of a very recent church fresco. As a Bulacan resident and having visited this church a couple of times before the pandemic, I know that this was only unveiled in November 2019 (corroborated by [2]). As there is no freedom of panorama in the Philippines, formal permission from the artist Maestro Eladio Santos to release these images under free/commercial licensing is a must (it is the uploader who should contact the artist himself). Undelete if the uploader (Judgefloro) has already permission from the artist (with the artist himself having sent the email via COM:OTRS process), or if FOP is introduced here (if the scope of FOP includes church works or interior artistic works).
- File:0393Diocesan Shrine and Parish of San Isidro Labrador - Pulilan 03.jpg
- File:0393Diocesan Shrine and Parish of San Isidro Labrador - Pulilan 04.jpg
- File:0393Diocesan Shrine and Parish of San Isidro Labrador - Pulilan 06.jpg
- File:0393Diocesan Shrine and Parish of San Isidro Labrador - Pulilan 13.jpg
- File:0393Diocesan Shrine and Parish of San Isidro Labrador - Pulilan 28.jpg
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:57, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- It is good that you brought our this very important point: I personally went to the Baliwag Tourism and PIO Office so that I can get photos of the Episcopal Coronation on February 2, since I only have photos which are not too close to the events for I was not able to get a pass; I was offered to get the photos without permission, since I was told that the Mayor F. Estrella before hiring photographers or even architects, as conditio sine qua non, would oblige the photographer for written transfer of Copyrights; I did not agree but asked for Written permission; I counter that today, the Camera would have watermarks and in the Wikimedia Commons metadetails, the Photographer would appear and beneath, is the "Copyright Holder";
- In our Roman Catholic Diocese of Malolos, the Titular Bishop Dennis C. Villarejo, predecessors and successors, ipso facto, acquires Copyright and moral rights of all those architects and painters; I would like to point here that One Photographer who was already paid by a Parish (name witheld, pending complaint to Bishop) would still stupidly put watermarks not of the Bishop like Malolos Sandigan, but the Watermarks of illegal under Canonn Law mentioning the name and copyright rights in the Metadetails; I am underscoring here, that the Copyright or moral rights are all inherent in the Titutar Bishop; and the Bishop Oliveros Church Circular on photography disallows only taking photos during mass and using Tripods without permission;
- But since about Feb 15, there is the Rotations of Priests, that is transfer to other assignment, if you can wait, I will talk to the New Parish Priest and advice him of Canon Law strict proviso that all architects and engineers who were hire or paid by the Parish automatically transfer their Copyrights to the Titular Bishop Villarejo; or if you wish, I can ask for permission from the architect; a final point, I saw with my 2 or 3 eyes that talking of the Architect with Fr. Mario Jose C. Ladra (son of Mateo and Elpidia Ladra from Calauan, Laguna born on February 4, 1953); so I conclude that the painter transferred all his moral rights to the Titular Bishop; Submitted Judgefloro (talk) 07:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Nota Bene: Allow me to state with certainty that my sibling who is a big donor of Church construction, especially in Green Meadows Christ the King Parish Church and even National Shrine of Divine Mercy, was approached by the Parish Priest (name withheld) to "palitin" 500,t checks for the construction of part of the Marilao National Shrine; and I vehemently scolded him since that was improper on their part; why should the Parish Priests not withdraw their tons of money and donated it to the Shrine instead; may I stress that Pope Francis repeatedly admonished many priests: "It pains me to see priests having new cars"; but I did photographed in many of my photos of 2,000 Parish Churches that priest have big cars not car; so, I do not see any logic, why a Catholic painter should not transfer moral rights to the Pulilan Church;
- And this painting objectively is dwarfed by Willy Layug who painted the Betis Church; if he did not transfer his Copyrights law, I would raise the matter to the Malolos Hierarchy for determination of Canon Law requirements, including, how much was paid, if any to him; this is my legal standpoint Submitted Judgefloro (talk) 07:13, 6 February 2021 (UTC) Judgefloro (talk) 07:16, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Judgefloro: civil law still prevails on copyright matters. It has been discussed at Commons talk:Copyright rules by territory/Philippines#Freedom of panorama for religious works and properties: canon law cannot override civil law (i.e. the IP Code of the Philippines or R. A. 8293). In compliance with COM:EVIDENCE, you are required to contact the parish church if the artist had transferred copyright to them. If he did, is the parish willing to release the artwork under commercial (CC/PD) licensing? If not, you must contact Eladio Santos (the artist per sources) if he would be willing to release the fresco under free and commercial-acceptable licensing. Contacting should be made by email, via COM:OTRS. As there is still no FOP in the Philippines for relevant works (2D church works), this is a required method. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:45, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Judgefloro: and please, if you were replied via letters, don't upload them here: just take pictures of those letters and submit them on this email address: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Your pictures of letters may be treated as out of scope (failing COM:EDUSE). The above email address will also be the recipient of either the parish church or the artist in the contact process, per COM:OTRS. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 01:26, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Unused private image, no educational value → out of scope. Jahobr (talk) 11:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jenenene18 (talk · contribs)
[edit]This is undisclosed paid editing, see https://wikipediapagecreator.godaddysites.com/ EXIF data is missing
Vera (talk) 13:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:52, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
unused personal photo, as well as File:Potelleret in 2018.png. Google does not show much notability apart from social media. Pibwl (talk) 18:10, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:50, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
File not being used (request by original uploader) Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 18:12, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Please, ignore this request for deletion. This file is actually better. I am nominating another file for deletion. Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 14:09, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Minoraxtalk 02:51, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
- also file:Famel logo2.png
Complex logos can be in Commons only with OTRS-permission. Taivo (talk) 19:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:49, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
screen from second life Matlin (talk) 19:41, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:50, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
screen from second life Matlin (talk) 19:41, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:50, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
screen from second life Matlin (talk) 19:43, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:50, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Low-quality map, usurped by File:2020 Colorado State Senate election results.svg Elliot321 (talk) 19:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:50, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Duplicate of deleted File:Tay G.jpg. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tay G.jpg. Un assiolo (talk) 20:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:49, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Unused cropped version of File:StateSenateSvgColorado.svg, has no good reason to exist and could potentially mislead. Elliot321 (talk) 20:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:48, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Unused private image, no educational value → out of scope. Jahobr (talk) 20:07, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:48, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
SEIZURE WARNING: out of scope, some kind of personal imagery flashing at a rate to cause damage to anyone with epilepsy or Brocha Syndrome. Not in use, no metadata. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete though commons isn't censored, keeping this image around is unnecessary given its lack of use. Elliot321 (talk) 23:08, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 02:48, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Unused old private image. --Jan Geier (talk) 12:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 03:44, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
The mosque was completed in 1999. There is no freedom of panorama in Iraq, permission from the architect is needed A1Cafel (talk) 03:18, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 00:53, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:Bunnia Mosque
[edit]The mosque was completed in 1973. There is no freedom of panorama in Iraq, permission from the architect is needed.
- File:1973 Baghdad mosque.jpg
- File:Al Buniyah Mosque (cropped).jpg
- File:Al Buniyah Mosque 3.jpg
- File:Al Buniyah Mosque.jpg
- File:Flickr - omar chatriwala - Bunnia mosque.jpg
- File:جامع الحاج بنية .jpg
- File:جامع الحاج بُنّية.jpg
- File:مسجد الحاج بنية.jpg
A1Cafel (talk) 10:15, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- @A1Cafel: , Hi, thanks for notification. I think the reason for nomination for deletion of my photos is not applicable as my pictures are not clear and they are in low resolution, so they do not show all the construction details. --Mahmoudalrawi (talk) 18:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 00:49, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:Jalil Al Khayat Mosque
[edit]The mosque was completed in 2007. There is no freedom of panorama in Iraq, permission from the architect is needed.
- File:Jalil Al Khayat Mosque(2).jpg
- File:Jalil Al Khayat Mosque.jpg
- File:Jalil Khaiat Mosque.jpg
- File:Jalil Khayat Mosque Arbil.jpeg
- File:Jalil Khayat Mosque Entrance 02.jpeg
- File:Jalil Khayat Mosque Entrance.jpeg
- File:Jalil Khayat Mosque.jpeg
- File:Jalylkhayat2016.jpg
- File:Khayyat Mosque Arbil 1.jpg
- File:Khayyat Mosque Arbil 2.jpg
A1Cafel (talk) 10:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 00:48, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
The mosque was completed in 2010, there is no freedom of panorama in Iraq, thus permission from the architect is needed A1Cafel (talk) 10:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 00:53, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
The mosque was completed in 2001, there is no freedom of panorama in Iraq, thus permission from the architect is needed A1Cafel (talk) 10:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 00:52, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
The mosque was completed in 2001, there is no freedom of panorama in Iraq, thus permission from the architect is needed A1Cafel (talk) 10:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 00:53, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
The mosque was completed in 2001, there is no freedom of panorama in Iraq, thus permission from the architect is needed A1Cafel (talk) 10:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 00:53, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
The mosque was completed in 1997, there is no freedom of panorama in Iraq, thus permission from the architect is needed A1Cafel (talk) 10:32, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 00:53, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Truor as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://areapatriniani.blogspot.com/2017/12/ambito-territorial-del-adelantamiento.html?m=1 — billinghurst sDrewth 23:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- I wonder, is this blog post free enough? Has the writer free licensed their blogspot? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:40, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, obviously without permission. --Túrelio (talk) 22:06, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
بسبب حقوق النشر NxAhmedy (talk) 23:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Comment probably {{Pd-textlogo}} in USA. Looks like the organization is in Switzerland, unsure of the TOO there. Elliot321 (talk) 04:38, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --shizhao (talk) 13:32, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Delete this Page . This Page is not really A PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE Page Journey mini (talk) 14:57, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete appears to be out of scope. Please be more cautious with filing deletion requests, though, you managed to screw up quite a few pages in filing this (which I have fixed) Journey mini. Elliot321 (talk) 15:14, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Deletesorry I am still new in the process , thanks for the fixes . but as this is a photograph of a person this must be a copyrighted material,so I thought its eligible for deletion Elliot321. --Journey mini (talk) 15:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)--Journey mini (talk) 15:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)journey mini
- Feel free to ask me questions you have about the process. (also fyi, you don't need to leave a signature every time you edit your comment - only when you make a totally new one). Elliot321 (talk) 15:29, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Cool .Thanks .
This is a Photograph of a Person and a copyrighted material . Journey mini (talk) 15:33, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- speedy deletion Db-g7 Prosenjit bhuniya (talk) 16:44, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete, uploader agrees. --Achim (talk) 22:22, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per above. G7. E4024 (talk) 22:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, though file does not qualify for G7, it's out of COM:SCOPE anyway. --Túrelio (talk) 08:43, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
- Very possibly not an own work. The user is uploading many files like this. E4024 (talk) 02:54, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete likely a copyvio, unless more info is provided. Elliot321 (talk) 15:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:31, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Shahrsakhtafzar (talk · contribs)
[edit]previously published on https://www.shahrsakhtafzar.com/fa/review/smartphone/30092-visit-isfahan-with-huawei-p40-pro. Needs permission via com:OTRS.
- File:Alighapoo Front.jpg
- File:Alighapoo Terrace Ceiling.jpg
- File:Seyyed Mosque.jpg
- File:Seyyed Mosque Mehrab.jpg
- File:Vank Cathedral Entrace.jpg
- File:Khajoo Bridge in Day.jpg
- File:Masjed-Jame-2-Big.jpg
- File:Masjed-Jame-1-Big.jpg
- File:Sheikh-Lotfollah-Ceiling.jpg
Hanooz 21:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Ticket:2021020810007711 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 13:00, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, before closing this, local WLM team is working on some issues before finalizing this DR Mardetanha talk 20:35, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: still no OTRS confirmation. --JuTa 08:09, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Restored: I went ahead and accepted the permission statement. 4nn1l2 (talk) 04:07, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Unused file, possible copy violation Sakhalinio (talk) 10:05, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Replaced in it:v:Sulla coppia Priv; Pfa al variare di Si/Ni, it:v:Sulla coppia Priv; Pfa al variare di Si/Ni nei correlatori digitali, it:v:SOFAR -il canale di propagazione del suono a grande distanza-, it:v:Calcolatore della probabilità di rivelazione nel sonar and it:v:Calcolatore della probabilità di rivelazione Priv dati: BW ; RC ; S/N ; Pfa with TeX equivalent:
Now unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 10:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Replaced in it:v:Sulla coppia Priv; Pfa al variare di Si/Ni and it:v:Sulla coppia Priv; Pfa al variare di Si/Ni nei correlatori digitali with TeX equivalent:
Now unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 10:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Replaced in it:v:Sulla coppia Priv; Pfa al variare di Si/Ni nei correlatori digitali with table equivalent:
RC in Sec. 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Now unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 10:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Replaced in it:v:Calcolatore della probabilità di rivelazione nel sonar and it:v:Calcolatore della probabilità di rivelazione Priv dati: BW ; RC ; S/N ; Pfa with TeX equivalent:
![{\displaystyle Crt=\left({\frac {2}{\pi }}\right)\arcsin \left[{\frac {1}{1+\left({\frac {Ni}{Si}}\right)^{2}}}\right]}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/48f005f1e3120d332d38100e54cf3fb70b5282ac)
Now unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 10:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Replaced in it:v:Calcolatore della probabilità di rivelazione nel sonar and it:v:Calcolatore della probabilità di rivelazione Priv dati: BW ; RC ; S/N ; Pfa with TeX equivalent:
![{\displaystyle \left({\frac {s}{n}}\right)_{db}=20\log \left[{\frac {1}{\sqrt {{\frac {1}{\operatorname {sen} \left(\pi \cdot {\frac {C}{2}}\right)}}-1}}}\right]}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/70e6b124d2cd3edd78c851c2c14a12e585b6a689)
Now unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 10:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Replaced in it:v:Calcolatore della probabilità di rivelazione nel sonar and it:v:Calcolatore della probabilità di rivelazione Priv dati: BW ; RC ; S/N ; Pfa with TeX equivalent:
![{\displaystyle d=2\cdot BW\cdot RC\cdot 10^{\left[{\frac {\left({\frac {Si}{Ni}}\right)_{db}}{20}}\right]^{4}}}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/b4f9c32d525b375e39849a677e1e5e34ffdc8341)
Now unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 10:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Replaced in it:v:Calcolatore della probabilità di rivelazione nel sonar, it:v:Calcolatore della probabilità di rivelazione Priv dati: BW ; RC ; S/N ; Pfa and it:v:Analisi del comportamento dei rivelatori d'energia sul rumore with TeX equivalent:
Now unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 10:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Replaced in it:v:Calcolatore della probabilità di rivelazione nel sonar and it:v:Calcolatore della probabilità di rivelazione Priv dati: BW ; RC ; S/N ; Pfa with TeX equivalent:
![{\displaystyle p(Riv.)=\left({\frac {1}{2}}\right)\left\{1-erf\left[{\frac {\left(q-{\sqrt {d}}\right)}{\sqrt {2}}}\right]\right\}}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/006a1146ee985194a5eac8183f6390737e613a1b)
Now unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 10:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Complimenti per il restauro delle mie brutte formule, ti ringrazio per l'aiuto, con i tuoi interventi rendi migliori le mie lezioni.
- --Funzioni di correlazione (talk) 16:31, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Prego, il piacere è tutto mio. --WIKImaniac 17:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Probable copyvio, given the uploader's history. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 18:02, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. PCP. --Minoraxtalk 11:24, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Duplication of File:Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom.svg. Fry1989 eh? 18:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Delete useless rasterisation of an svg file. Kathisma (talk) 16:01, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:24, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:Samarinda Islamic Center
[edit]The mosque was completed in 2008. There is no freedom of panorama in Indonesia, permission from the architect is needed.
- File:Islamic Centre - panoramio - Kurniawan Dwi.jpg
- File:Islamic Centre by bloesafir - panoramio - Bloesafir Pamanjagau.jpg
- File:Islamic Centre Mosque - panoramio.jpg
- File:Islamic Centre Samarinda - panoramio (1).jpg
- File:Islamic Centre Samarinda - panoramio - Bloesafir Pamanjagau.jpg
- File:Islamic Centre Samarinda - panoramio.jpg
- File:IslamicCenter-1.jpg
- File:IslamicCenter-2.jpg
- File:IslamicCenter-4.jpg
- File:IslamicCenter1.jpg
- File:IslamicCenter3.jpg
- File:IslamicCenter4.jpg
- File:IslamicCenter5.jpg
- File:IslamicCenter6.jpg
- File:IslamicCentre7.jpg
- File:Masjid Islamic Center Samarinda.JPG
- File:Mosque Samarinda 1.jpg
- File:Mosque Samarinda.jpg
- File:Samarinda Islamic Center Mosque at Night.jpg
- File:Samarinda Islamic Center Mosque.jpg
- File:Samarinda Masjid Islamic Center.jpg
A1Cafel (talk) 10:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
On hold Due to Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:An-Nur Great Mosque and the related COM:VPC discussions. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:30, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete the consensus of that forum remains: no FOP in Indonesia that's acceptable to Commons. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:46, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Deferring to Commons policy. Danu Widjajanto (talk) 22:06, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --4nn1l2 (talk) 12:55, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Copyright watermark on the file. E4024 (talk) 12:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; pcp. --Gbawden (talk) 10:08, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Photographer's name on the image. E4024 (talk) 20:50, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- Gbawden, maybe you will speedy this, if it is a "deleted file re-uploaded" case; I do not remember the image. --E4024 (talk) 20:52, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; speedy as a copyvio. --Gbawden (talk) 08:23, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Fake own work. E4024 (talk) 14:28, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- *Delete appears to be an oft created file that is not own work and requires permissions Timtrent (talk) 08:15, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violation, found elsewhere on the web and unlikely to be own work (F1). --Эlcobbola talk 17:39, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Author request. Tyseria (d) 12:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: Courtesy deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 10:09, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
LTA. Please see the cat I had made to bring together their OoS files: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Ratna_Sarita&action=edit&redlink=1 E4024 (talk) 13:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- It is also a dubious own work w/o EXIF. Please delete speedily so their WD item can also be deleted. (WP spam deletion on course.) --E4024 (talk) 13:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Her spam article on WP is speedy deleted. --E4024 (talk) 20:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- @E4024 and Achim55: somewhat problematic person, must be {{Speedydelete}} and also look at uncyclopedia. --MRZQ (talk) 16:31, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:09, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
copyright violation Theroadislong (talk) 16:11, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Slap Template:npd on it and call it a day. Davidwr (talk) 16:31, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:08, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
unused, doesn't seem in a scope, no cat. Pibwl (talk) 18:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:07, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by SkwidyVard (talk · contribs)
[edit]Perhaps these may have fall under G3. Content intended as vandalism, threat, or attack of criteria for speedy deletion, these are in textual form and may be defended as forms of parody. However, these ultimately fail a simple criterion: COM:SCOPE and COM:EDUSE. 100% No educational value.
- File:PUTANG INA MO, AL TORRES.jpg
- File:Ang Pambansang Awit ng mga Fantards ng The One That Got Away You're A Star Fantards.png
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per nom. —hueman1 (talk • uploads) 01:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy delete. It has also a part of screenshot of a YouTube video: https://youtube.com/hU7uNUeo-2c. Cyrus noto3at bulaga (Talk to me) 12:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per nom. JJPMaster (talk) 12:34, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:07, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Suspected flickrwashing. New user, only 3 files and 0 views. Didym (talk) 20:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:06, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Unused (since 2008) graph with a poor quality. Better analogs exist. Also - File:55 CnC.png Юрий Д.К. (talk) 23:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:15, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Small file with transmission code, not an own work; most probably taken from social media. E4024 (talk) 03:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete :- No information of any such personality on Google. Thanks --C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 07:18, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 13:15, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
This is a userpage image of a Turkish youngster and as such I have no problem with it. The image reflects contemporary Turkish young men, etc. The problem is, the user is only making personal promotion, here and in WD, WP). Even in his WD item he has used as alternative names the city where he was born! So that people who look for the city will come to meet this OoS "film director". I hate to say personal things but better transparent than not: The other day I filmed my small nephew with a cook hat, playing with foodstuff. It is almost an internet phenomenon by now. Should I make myself a "video films director" cat? (Prizes received: A kiss from his mother. :) E4024 (talk) 15:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Note: I categorized this file. --E4024 (talk) 15:04, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Another note: Now I noticed that the file comes from Twitter. In this case it must be a speedy, no? --E4024 (talk) 20:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; copyvio. --Gbawden (talk) 13:05, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Copyright violation https://www.istockphoto.com/vector/two-teenage-girls-going-to-the-beach-gm165737742-12723175 Theroadislong (talk) 16:12, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Slap Template:npd on it and call it a day. Davidwr (talk) 16:32, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 13:04, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
It was posted to wikimedia without permission. 2601:14D:8400:5BE0:CD6C:23ED:E865:EECC 19:22, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 13:08, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
unsure of copyright Namiba (talk) 20:07, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; taken from FB per MD. --Gbawden (talk) 13:07, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Fictional Cuban Province Flags
[edit]- File:Flag of the Villa Clara Province, Cuba (proposal).svg deleted not in use. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:32, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- File:Bandera de la provincia de Santiago de Cuba.svg
- File:Bandera de la provincia de La Habana.svg
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Granma.svg
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Sancti Spíritus.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Guantánamo(proposal).svg
- File:Flag of Camagüey, Cuba (proposal).svg deleted not in use. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:32, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- File:Bandera de la Isla de la Juventud.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Villa Clara.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Pinar del Río.png
- File:Flag of the Mayabeque Province, Cuba (proposal).svg
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Guantánamo.png
- File:Flag of the Province of Matanzas, Cuba (proposal).svg
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Mayabeque.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Holguín.png
- File:Flag of the Ciego de Ávila Province, Cuba (proposal).svg
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Santiago de Cuba.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Camagüey.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia La Habana.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Granma.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Cienfuegos.png
- File:Flag of the Las Tunas Province, Cuba (proposal).svg deleted not in use. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:32, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Ciego de Ávila.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Las Tunas.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Matanzas.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Artemisa.png
It's been a long while since I've created a deletion request and this is my first on Wikimedia Commons so please forgive any mistakes. Today on this Vexilology forum someone posted a link to a flag that they encountered on Wikimedia Common that was purported to be the official flag of the province of Isla de la Juventud. Post: https://www.reddit.com/r/vexillology/comments/ld76u2/today_i_found_out_that_the_flag_of_the_isla_de_la/gm4aio9/ However, a moderator of the forum points out that this flag was made by a non-Cuban as part of a series of proposed or aspirational flags and provided further proof from the official page of the Government of the province that there is no evidence of an official flag. The moderator traced the original images back to a post on a live journal page which marks the images as proposals. http://cayito0611533059.blogspot.com/2012/06/cuba-banderas-provinciales_03.html
And further in the comments section: "Esas banderas provinciales son todas inventadas y no dan cuenta real del trabajo que se está haciendo para rescatar el patrimonio heráldico y vexilológico de Cuba. El escudo de armas de Las Tunas no es un escudo provincial, sino únicamente de la ciudad de Las Tunas. Lo mismo pasa con la bandera de la ciudad de Cienfuegos, que aquí nos venden como bandera provincial, cuando no es así. Pertenece únicamente a la capital provincial. Hay un nuevo libro de Maikel Arista-Salado que se titula "Los Escudos Cívicos de Cuba". Creo que deberían leérselo para tomar nota de nuestra simbología cívica y actualizar la página."
(Google Translation: These provincial flags are all invented and do not give a real account of the work that is being done to rescue the heraldic and vexillological heritage of Cuba. The coat of arms of Las Tunas is not a provincial coat of arms, but only of the city of Las Tunas. The same happens with the flag of the city of Cienfuegos, which is sold here as a provincial flag, when it is not. It belongs only to the provincial capital. There is a new book by Maikel Arista-Salado entitled "Los Escudos Cívicos de Cuba". I think they should read it to you to take note of our civic symbology and refresh the page.)
The book referenced in this post "Los Escudos Cívicos de Cuba" by Maikel Arista-Salado has no mentions of these flags: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/3016552.pdf
These proposed / aspirational / redesign flags designs are common in vexillological circles often are mistaken for actual flags. One particular user involved in uploading these images, Santiago_RD, has uploaded past fictional flags to the commons in the past and they have been deleted before. History here: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Fictitious flags of municipalities of the Dominican Republic
--Kunzite (talk) 05:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Delete - Oh wow, my bad. I just seen they had uploaded png versions and I made some into svgs. I dully apologise and support this DR. --Cookieman1.1.1 (talk) 16:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- No worries. Thanks for cleaning up some of those those funky bitmap flags. --Kunzite (talk) 09:21, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Santiago_RD Response from the comment page: "I have stated before in the description of the files I have made that these are not official flags, that these are proposals, therefore they should be labeled as such. Deleting these files is meaningless in my opinion, the better solution would be to just re-label the flags that have not been labeled as proposed flags to proposed flags. The people who use my work on pages to paint it as an actual flag have obviously not read the description, in fact, I removed some of them off the page myself but some people, usually ones who do not have an account on wikipedia, ended up posting them on the page again, thankfully another user removed them from the pages." Commons_talk:Deletion_requests/Fictional_Cuban_Province_Flags --Kunzite (talk) 09:21, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Delete - It's just another case of how the Wikipedia cycle can damage vexillology. People don't read or understand what they are reading, so that many fictional flags end up being used (added) to wiki articles (in all wiki languages) as if they were the flag of the place.--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 12:15, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- Comment : I agree that fictionnal emblems should have no place here (if it were to me, the whole "arms of micronations" category would be removed). But unfortunately, some of the files are in use and therefore considered as in scope. Kathisma (talk) 16:00, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete I'm author of several files and I agree to delete them. It's better than Wikipedia was empty of fictionnal emblems. I don't have any reference of what I have done. NACLE (talk) 17:17, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- Also delete This one also and probably others have been recreated into .svg and should be deleted. *File:Flag of the Artemisa Province(proposal).svg--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 18:17, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete I'm author of several files and I agree to delete them. It's better than Wikipedia was empty of fictionnal emblems. I don't have any reference of what I have done. NACLE (talk) 17:17, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
- @The Eloquent Peasant: @Kunzite: Please Note: I have deleted the only ones that are actually eligible right now. All the folks who want these deleted also need to replace them as most of these are "in use." Please ping me when you have replaced all these with valid images. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:32, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Ellin Beltz: All of these are no longer in use. Re: replacing them with valid images, from what I've read on this discussion these are invented / made up / proposed by someone so there is nothing to replace them with. Thanks much.
- File:Bandera de la provincia de Santiago de Cuba.svg
- File:Bandera de la provincia de La Habana.svg
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Sancti Spíritus.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Guantánamo(proposal).svg
- File:Bandera de la Isla de la Juventud.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Villa Clara.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Pinar del Río.png
- File:Flag of the Mayabeque Province, Cuba (proposal).svg
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Guantánamo.png
- File:Flag of the Province of Matanzas, Cuba (proposal).svg
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Mayabeque.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Holguín.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Santiago de Cuba.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Camagüey.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia La Habana.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Granma.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Cienfuegos.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Ciego de Ávila.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Las Tunas.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Matanzas.png
- File:Bandera de la Provincia Artemisa.png
There is also this one which was made into .svg *File:Flag of the Artemisa Province(proposal).svg . Thanks.. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 23:47, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Ellin Beltz: I was reading this request for a hoaxer who uploads fakes flags and has been doing it for years (and doesn't respond to comments.--> Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Fictitious flags of municipalities of the Dominican Republic So I guess there's just no way to stop userswho continually upload hoax / fake flags. Santiago_RD --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 11:48, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination & discussion below. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 13:50, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Not "own work". Uploaded by LTA vandal, blocked on Wikipedia. Tdl1060 (talk) 23:55, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Weak keep likely a {{Pd-textlogo}}, but not used anywhere. Elliot321 (talk) 04:35, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Elliot321: A PNG version of this logo was uploaded by the same user and is currently used on Wikipedia.--Tdl1060 (talk) 10:23, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- then Delete, for redundancy. Elliot321 (talk) 12:38, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- then
Deleted: Non-trivial logo. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:33, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 16:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:51, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo above threshold of originality. Not uploader's own work. Uploaded by a LTA vandal who is blocked on Wikipedia. Tdl1060 (talk) 23:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Seems to be within TOO to me. The shape is sufficiently simple. Elliot321 (talk) 04:39, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: Within TOO IMO. --Gbawden (talk) 07:49, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
No evidence logo is in the public domain in Singapore. Uses a stylised font, especially for the letter T. It should be reuploaded on the English Wikipedia under fair use. Seloloving (talk) 14:27, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
Public Transit logos of Singapore
[edit]Relisting as no decision was made. Logo is believed to be copyrighted in its home country, Singapore, which has a lower threshold of originality than the United States. Singapore's copyright law is frequently compared with Common law; the EDGE Magazine logo was found to be copyrighted in the United Kingdom under the pretext that despite being composed of basic geometric shapes, it remains copyrighted. The latter should be uploaded to English Wikipedia under PD-ineligible-USonly, which I have now done, while the former deleted as it has been superseded. Seloloving (talk) 00:22, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Singapore's TOO is significantly lower than the US's. Elliot321 (talk) 15:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --rubin16 (talk) 10:25, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Upload wrong Cyril Yoshi (talk) 04:08, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy delete: COM:CSD#G7. The creation of nomination page for deletion is on the same day of uploading. Sun8908 (talk) 04:01, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:CSD#G7 was applicable at the time of nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 22:11, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
False year in the title and all links are now correct. Malo95 (talk) 08:10, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: renamed. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:34, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Giftzwerg 88 as duplicate (duplicate) and the most recent rationale was: duplicates of File:Ansichten von Rexingen 04.jpg (first version). Multiple exposures of the same subject from the same angle — billinghurst sDrewth 00:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete multiple exposures not needed. Elliot321 (talk) 15:19, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete As I am the uploader the spurious exposures were made by accident and should never have made it to the upload cue. They provide no additional information and since I have not kept the original RAW I am also not able to provide any processed versions of them. Keep the file name as a redirect, just in case.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 22:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Giftzwerg 88 as duplicate (duplicate) and the most recent rationale was: duplicates of File:Ansichten von Rexingen 04.jpg (first version). Multiple exposures of the same subject from the same angle — billinghurst sDrewth 00:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete multiple exposures not needed. Elliot321 (talk) 15:19, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:12, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Photograph needs a license. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 02:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete improper license. Elliot321 (talk) 15:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: Uploaded as own work on enwiki in 2005, so had to be GFDL or public domain (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Permalink/16244751.). Using GFDL because it is more restrictive. Tags updated accordingly. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:02, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
There is no publication info except the website is came from, there it cannot be PD-US, and should not be on Commons. Peacemaker67 (talk) 02:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep the website lists all the photos as public domain. "Svi materijali su u javnom vlasništvu, ukoliko nije drukčije naznačeno" roughly translates to "All materials are in the public domain, unless otherwise stated", in addition to the public domain logo. Elliot321 (talk) 15:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Being PD in Yugoslavia does not mean it is PD in the US. If it is not PD in the US it cannot be on Commons. Peacemaker67 (talk) 20:46, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. No proof of {{PD-Yugoslavia}}. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
There is no publication info except the website is came from, there it cannot be PD-US, and should not be on Commons. Peacemaker67 (talk) 02:53, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep the website lists all the photos as public domain. "Svi materijali su u javnom vlasništvu, ukoliko nije drukčije naznačeno" roughly translates to "All materials are in the public domain, unless otherwise stated", in addition to the public domain logo. Elliot321 (talk) 15:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Being PD in Yugoslavia does not mean it is PD in the US. If it is not PD in the US it cannot be on Commons. Peacemaker67 (talk) 20:44, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. No proof of {{PD-Yugoslavia}}. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:15, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Die Verbreitung im Internet von Hinrichtungsbildern ohne Altersbeschränkung (eine welche es ja bei Wikipedia und Wikicommons nicht gibt) ist gesetzeswidrig. Unbeschadet strafrechtlicher Verantwortlichkeit sind Angebote unzulässig, wenn sie grausame oder sonst unmenschliche Gewalttätigkeiten gegen Menschen in einer Art schildern, die das Grausame oder Unmenschliche des Vorgangs in einer die Menschenwürde verletzenden Weise darstellt [ § 4 (1) JMStV - Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag, Staatsvertrag über den Schutz der Menschenwürde und den Jugendschutz in Rundfunk und Telemedien (Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag – JMStV)]. Es steht außer Frage, daß die Menschenwürde des dargestellten Enthauptungsopfers schon durch die Darstellung der Enthauptung an sich verletzt wird. Hieran ändert auch die Historizität der Darstellung nichts. Die Darstellung richtet sich sohin gegen die freiheitlich demokratische Grundordnung , Art. 1 GG. Das Gesetz sieht auch keine Verjährung der Menschenwürde vor, insofern diese postmortal weiterbesteht. Sofern Anbieter Angebote, die geeignet sind, die Entwicklung von Kindern oder Jugendlichen zu einer eigenverantwortlichen und gemeinschaftsfähigen Persönlichkeit zu beeinträchtigen, verbreiten oder zugänglich machen, haben sie dafür Sorge zu tragen, dass Kinder oder Jugendliche der betroffenen Altersstufen sie üblicherweise nicht wahrnehmen, § 5 (1) JMStV. Das Bild ist daher zu löschen. Uwe Martens (talk) 14:33, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
- Speedy keep: Commons is not censored. --Amitie 10g (talk) 03:59, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep: As per above, Commons is not censored, so finding an image distasteful is not in itself a valid reason for deletion. --DAJF (talk) 04:57, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Idem. — Racconish 📥 06:50, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Speedy keep: The Commons are not subject to German law. --Chricho (talk) 07:37, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Media content is considered by the German youth protection laws as harmful to minors if it tends to endanger their process of developing a socially responsible and self-reliant personality [§ 18 (1) JuSchG]. This applies especially to media that contain extremely violent or morally harmful media, as in this case. The supply and distribution of content likely to harm minors and adolescents without age restriction is forbidden and will be punished. If there is no technical possibility to fulfill the German youth protection legislation, e.g. by filtering the IP, the files have to be deleted. Please notice by the way, that I don't have the time to study international youth protection legislation right now!
- Strong keep, obviously. German law, or indeed Islamic sensitivities or general prudishness of any sort (search for, e.g. "penis"), are not valid deletion criteria. Commons is not censored, and just because you or your group are offended enough to have enacted a law doesn't mean we have to obey or respect it. Unless of course that law is in a legal jurisdiction that covers Florida. Storkk (talk) 12:50, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Ok, for those, they think, this is only a German case: It is also a European case, see the following, English and German version:
Act of law 98/560/EC
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION
Whereas the present recommendation addresses, in particular, issues of protection of minors and of human dignity in relation to audiovisual and information services made available to the public, whatever the means of conveyance (such as broadcasting, proprietary on-line services or services on the Internet);
Annex
INDICATIVE GUIDELINES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION, AT NATIONAL LEVEL, OF A SELF-REGULATION FRAMEWORK FOR THE PROTECTION OF MINORS AND HUMAN DIGNITY IN ON-LINE AUDIOVISUAL AND INFORMATION SERVICES
2.2.1. Protection of minors
(b) Presentation of legal contents which may harm minors
Objective: where possible, legal content which may harm minors or affect their physical, mental or moral development should be presented in such a way as to provide users with basic information on its potentially harmful effect on minors.
The codes of conduct should therefore address, for example, the issue of basic rules for the businesses providing on-line services concerned and for users and suppliers of content; the rules should set out the conditions under which the supply and distribution of content likely to harm minors should be subject, where possible, to protection measures such as:
- a warning page, visual signal or sound signal,
- descriptive labelling and/or classification of contents,
- systems to check the age of users.
Priority should be given, in this regard, to protection systems applied at the presentation stage to legal content which is clearly likely to be harmful to minors, such as pornography or violence.
Rechtsakt 98/560/EG
DER RAT DER EUROPÄISCHEN UNION
Die vorliegende Empfehlung befaßt sich insbesondere mit der Problematik des Jugendschutzes und des Schutzes der Menschenwürde in audiovisuellen Diensten und Informationsdiensten, die der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich gemacht werden, unabhängig von der Übertragungsart (z. B. Rundsendedienste, anbieterspezifische Online-Dienste oder Internet-Dienste).
Anhang
LEITSÄTZE FÜR DIE SCHAFFUNG VON SELBSTKONTROLLSYSTEMEN DER MITGLIEDSTAATEN FÜR DEN JUGENDSCHUTZ UND DEN SCHUTZ DER MENSCHENWÜRDE IN DEN ONLINE ANGEBOTENEN AUDIOVISUELLEN DIENSTEN UND INFORMATIONSDIENSTEN
2.2.1. Jugendschutz
(b) Darstellung von Inhalten, die zwar legal, aber jugendgefährdend sind
Ziel: Inhalte, die zwar legal, aber jugendgefährdend sind oder die körperliche, geistige oder charakterliche Entwicklung von Jugendlichen beeinträchtigen konnten, sollten - soweit möglich - so dargestellt werden, daß die Benutzer grundlegende Informationen über ihre potentiell jugendgefährdende Wirkung erhalten.
Die Verhaltenskodizes sollten daher beispielsweise die Frage von Grundregeln für die betreffenden Anbieter von Online-Diensten, Benutzer und Inhalteanbieter behandeln. In den Regeln sollte festgelegt werden, unter welchen Bedingungen bei der Bereitstellung und Verbreitung jugendgefährdender Inhalte - soweit dies möglich ist - Schutzmaßnahmen getroffen werden sollten, wie z. B.:
- eine Begrüßungsseite mit einem Warnhinweis, ein Ton- oder Bildsignal;
- eine beschreibende Kennzeichnung und/oder Einstufung der Inhalte;
- Systeme zur Kontrolle des Alters der Benutzer.
Vorrang sollten dabei Schutzsysteme haben, die bei der Ankündigung von Inhalten zur Anwendung kommen, die zwar legal sind, aber eindeutig jugendgefährdend sein können, wie z. B. Pornographie oder Gewaltdarstellungen.
-- Uwe Martens (talk) 15:21, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Whatever the case may be in the EU, it doesn't pertain to Florida, which isn't in the EU. If you have problems with German Wikipedia's use of these files, this is not the forum. Please bring your problem to German Wikipedia. Storkk (talk) 17:19, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Yeah, I did this already, but there I get many reproaches and reprisals, that I didn't clarify this here in Wikimedia at first. So everything, what I'm doing, is wrong! It seems, that Wikipedia/-media aren't that open community as they present it on the outside! -- Uwe Martens (talk) 18:40, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep, COM:INUSE. –Be..anyone (talk) 13:09, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Enthauptung in China 1901.jpg -- とある白い猫 ちぃ？ 00:43, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
This image has no publication information except the website it was drawn from, so cannot be US-PD and held on Commons. Peacemaker67 (talk) 02:59, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep per the website, at http://www.srpska-mreza.com/library/facts/knifed.html "Feel free to download, copy and redistribute." Elliot321 (talk) 15:32, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete, according to my argumentation of 2015, further website owner of the source given in the vote above is not authorized to grant any license, which country's copyright law ever, as he's not the author of the picture or the book containing the picture (only of the scan itself). -- Uwe Martens (talk) 07:15, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- Comment For additional sources see here, here and here. — Racconish 💬 08:10, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- Being PD in Yugoslavia does not mean it is PD in the US. If it is not PD in the US it cannot be on Commons. Peacemaker67 (talk) 20:45, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep COM:INUSE. Kizule (talk) 20:32, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. No proof of {{PD-Yugoslavia}}. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
This image has no publication info other than the website it was drawn from, and so cannot be PD-US or held on Commons. Peacemaker67 (talk) 03:02, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep source website says the photos are public domain. Elliot321 (talk) 15:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Being PD in Yugoslavia does not mean it is PD in the US. If it is not PD in the US it cannot be on Commons. Peacemaker67 (talk) 20:44, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. No proof of {{PD-Yugoslavia}}. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:18, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
This image has no publication information except a website it has been drawn from, so it cannot be PD-US or held on Commons. Peacemaker67 (talk) 03:04, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep. According to the template, it fulfills criterion b) it is an anonymous work and it was published before January 1st, 1949. It's from the state funeral of President of the Croatian Parliament. We have no reason to suspect that it was published after 1949 – why would one keep this photograph in the drawer for years? The photo is all over the internet, with various conflicting descriptions [3][4] (although ours seem most plausible). Interestingly enough, it seems to been analyzed in IEEE Technology and Society Magazine [5] although even there it claims that it's Došen on the photograph (obviously not possible if it's his funeral). No such user (talk) 07:38, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
This image has no publication information other than the website it was drawn from, so cannot be PD-US or held on Commons. Peacemaker67 (talk) 03:05, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep it would be PD-1996 in published in Yugoslavia 1948.
Deleted: per nomination. no proof of publication. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Replaced in ru:PN-треугольники with TeX equivalent:
Now unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 08:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Replaced in ru:PN-треугольники with TeX equivalent:
Now unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 08:47, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Replaced in ru:PN-треугольники with TeX equivalent:
Now unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 08:47, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Replaced in ru:PN-треугольники with TeX equivalent:
Now unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 08:47, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 10:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 10:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 10:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 10:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Unused poor quality photo. Much better version at photo File:PhotoAndywithCartercropped.xcf. Malcolma (talk) 11:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for cropping and uploading. Seniorexpat (talk)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
No indicated source of individual images on this montage. To the uploader: it is highly recommended to upload original versions of your individual files first before creating a collage/montage, unless the component images are copyright violations (grabbed from Internet or social media sites) themselves. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- ... in which case neither the montage should be uploaded. –LPfi (talk) 07:38, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. SHB2000 (talk) 23:00, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 16:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:35, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
Replaced in es:UDP-glucosa pirofosforilasa with TeX equivalent:
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
![209 File:"Morts pour la patrie" d'Anto Carte, 1927.jpg](#File:"Morts_pour_la_patrie"_d'Anto_Carte,_1927.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.webp&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.webp&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.webp&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.webp&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.webp&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Now unused image that should not be an image WIKImaniac 16:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
File:Lezgian people, dancing lezginka in Akhti village in Dagestanskaya Oblast. Beginingth of XX century.jpg
[edit]
Информация не верная. Это не Ахты. Vendettaaa (talk) 01:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- What? That is not a valid deletion reason. CuriousGolden (talk) 07:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep translated deletion reason is "The information is not correct. This is not Akhty". If this can be evidenced in some stronger way, then delete. Elliot321 (talk) 15:22, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Поддерживаю удаление файла. В учетной документации Российского этнографического музея место съемки фотографии РЭМ 4928-6 - цахурское село Гельмец (Рутульский район). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Евгения Гуляева (talk • contribs) 22:48, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep, deletion isn't necessary, just edit and change the information to the correct. The photo is from c. 1900, so it should not be a copyright issue. Joojay (talk) 04:50, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Use {{Fact disputed}} or {{Rename}} instead. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 23:59, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
Not an own work but a derivative work (see original upload please). Maybe could be PD for age, but the license must be changed. E4024 (talk) 02:39, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Weak delete unclear licensing. Elliot321 (talk) 15:25, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 23:59, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
This image lacks publication info other than the news website it was drawn from, so therefore cannot be PD-US or held on Commons. Peacemaker67 (talk) 03:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:00, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Why should be this image a NASA work? The German astronauts stand in front of an antenna from the DLR probably in Cologne, Germany. The source book "Women in Space Following Valentina" is from David J. Shayler and Ian A. Moule, historians from the United Kingdom and is © Copyright, 2005 Praxis Publishing Ltd. We have no hint for US governmental work, so COM:PCP! Ras67 (talk) 03:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- While there are likely arguments for deletion, this is a completely ridiculous one. The photo is described in the illustration page of the book as the team selection photo: those are official photos taken by NASA, like official portraits. The book was used as the immediate source, rather than other instances of the photo, because of the context provided in it. To suggest that because the book used as the immediate source was published in the UK in 2005 means that a photo clearly taken in a different country decades before might not be those things is like saying because a photo from two years ago is in someone’s passport they might have been born only two years ago. In both cases the immediate source itself tells you that is ridiculous - passports give birth dates, the book describes the photo. You can’t say “better safe than sorry, an old photo might be from 2005 because I didn’t bother reading the source”. Kingsif (talk) 13:50, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Kept: per page xxii in the linked book: "unless otherwise stated, all photographs are from the author's collection or courtesy NASA. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:06, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Small file with transmission code, not an own work; most probably taken from social media. E4024 (talk) 03:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:06, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Pukar Khanal is the research scholar and this image is of him. He doesnot want his image to be displayed publicly. Kindly delete it Richardgren (talk) 04:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: courtesy deletion, only used on userpage of non-contributing user. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:08, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Scan from a publication, need information about the source and the copyright holder of the photograph. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 04:04, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:08, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Logo uploaded for the purpose of advertising by a single-purpose account with no other contributions; file not in use. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 04:21, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:08, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
We have no proof, that this photo is from NASA, COM:PCP! Ras67 (talk) 04:32, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:09, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Photo of a photo. Yuraily Lic (talk) 08:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:10, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Per talk page, map is inaccurate. Correct map is File:Darlingtonia.svg and there is no use for this one. 63.231.37.32 09:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, superseded. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:11, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
No information about the original image taken until 1970. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 10:27, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
This image was taken until 1970. What information do you need? This is my grand-grandfather - our own image user:Dergalev 12:04, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- It's a derivative work of the historical photograph that is uploaded as a modern own work by the uploader. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 08:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Noone else has negatives: it's our family's photo. user:Dergalev 19:15, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, and out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:11, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
File:View of Istanbul with sailboats on the water and Galata Tower in the distance LCCN2010650595.tif
[edit]A better version exists and this one is not being used. Nanahuatl (talk) 10:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: tif is the lossless source file. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:13, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
false "own work" licencing as this image is a part of the original map [6] from page 419 of printed book "Всемирная история: В десяти томах". Том 2 (1956) ("World History" vol.2, p.419) [7] Bogomolov.PL (talk) 11:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
![[6]](http://historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000017/pic/map09.gif){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:13, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
false "own work" licencing as image is from printed book Г.А. Абдурагимов "Кавказская Албания - Лезгистан: история и современность" - Санкт-Петербург ; Махачкала : Изд-во Даг. гос. пед. ун-та, 1995 [8] p. 483 Bogomolov.PL (talk) 11:43, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Здравствуйте. Можно узнать причину удаления? Вы просто источник указали.--Vendettaaa (talk) 21:22, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
- Нельзя копировать чужие изображения, это возможно только если источник находится официально в общественном достоянии (то есть на него нет копирайтов). Но и даже в таком случае надо указывать источник изображения, т.е. книга такая-то, авторства такого-то. А вот выдавать украденное (да, по закону это присвоение чужого) как якобы "собственную работу", как якобы сам загружающий является автором картинки, просто незаконно. А Викисклад и Википедия блюдут законы. Представьте, что Вы нарисовали картину, опубликовали в Интернете, где указали, что это именно Ваше произведение. Но потом некий википедист загрузил это изображение на Викисклад и указал, что это его картина. Порядочно ли это? Нет. Ведь википедист мог бы обратиться к автору и попросить автора самому загрузить свою картину и указать, что именно он ее нарисовал и загрузил. Но! Всё, что загружается на Викисклад может быть использовано в любых, в том числе коммерческих целях, а потому загруженное изображение может кто угодно использовать в рекламе, политике. Да просто пририсовать мерзкие штучки этому изображению. И это будет ненаказуемо, так как всё, что загружено на Викисклад каждый может использовать как захочет. На законных основаниях, подчеркиваю. Поэтому-то и нельзя загружать на Викисклад не своё, чужое, выдавая за якобы "собственную работу". Это нарушает закон, нарушает элементарные нормы порядочности. Поэтому такие изображения и удаляют. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 06:46, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, and out of scope as text-only diagram. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:14, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
jimin.jp (LDP of Japan) have this file, not from kantei.jp (Government of Japan). Lee Gok Da (talk) 13:02, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- Delete I have checked. --TKsdik8900 (talk) 06:31, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:15, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
This image has no publication info other than the website it was drawn from, it is therefore not PD-US and should not be on Commons. Peacemaker67 (talk) 06:05, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, missing essential info. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:32, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
This image does not have publication information other than the website it is drawn from, and therefore is not PD-US, and should not be on Commons. Peacemaker67 (talk) 06:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, missing essential info. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:32, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Pictures without camera details tend to be suspect. We require a very much better declaration of source and/or permissions. See COM:OTRS. Potential copyright violation. In addition to this concern it is a blurred picture and should be replaced by one in shape focus. This one appears to have been cropped and zoomed from an unspecified original work whose copyright status is unknown Timtrent (talk) 13:11, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
I saw her talk show at Sapporo Station by accident and I took her photo from distance using my smartphone, so the quality of the image is so poor. This image is cropped but unfortunately I lost my original. --毒島みるく (talk) 05:14, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
Kept: for now as claimed by uploader. AGF. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:17, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
This picture is from the grave, but the original photo still has copyrights I think, in spite it is "published" on the grave , especially in this format, when the face is cropped from the grave JSoos (talk) 16:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- It is located in a municipal public space - in a cemetery - which means that freedom of panorama provision, which exists in Hungary, permits taking a photography without regard to the copyright of the original photo. It is basically the same as a photography of a recent sculpture which is also permitted under freedom of panorama law. See COM:FOP Zello (talk) 17:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
The problem is that this is not a panorama picture of the grave itself, but this is the face picture "reproduction". JSoos (talk) 19:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- There is no such requirement in freedom of panorama law quite the opposite: "Under the Act No. LXXVI of 1999, updated to 2019, if a fine art, architectural or applied art creation is erected with a permanent character outdoors in a public place, a view of it may be made and used without the authorization of the author and paying remuneration to him." This photography on the grave is a detail of an art creation with a permanent character outdoors in a public place. You can take a photo of any detail of such public works of art, not only a "panorama picture" - nothing in the law says otherwise. The picture is absolutely irreplaceble, it is used on several articles and finding the grave was practically the only way to obtain a legal portrait for Wikipedia that shows the discoverer of the Seuso Treasure. Zello (talk) 20:52, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep COM:FOP Hungary applies. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: per User:Liuxinyu970226. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:23, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:23, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work. Single upload, too small photo with FB as source per EXIF data. Smooth O (talk) 17:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC) My own work. I have been there, otherwise I wouldn't have written it is so. --Vrpka (talk) 10:18, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. At minimum, it needs COM:VRT since it was previously published. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:24, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
File:Fairview Cemetery Landscape Plan - Fairview Cemetery, 700 Yale Boulevard Southeast, Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, NM HALS NM-6 (sheet 3 of 3).png
[edit].png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Bürgerentscheid as duplicate (Duplicate) and the most recent rationale was: Fairview Cemetery Landscape Plan - Fairview Cemetery, 700 Yale Boulevard Southeast, Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, NM HALS NM-6 (sheet 3 of 3).tif|later upload
Converted to regular DR per Commons:Deletion_policy#Duplicates.-- Túrelio (talk) 20:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:28, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
File:Fairview Cemetery Plan - Fairview Cemetery, 700 Yale Boulevard Southeast, Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, NM HALS NM-6 (sheet 2 of 3).png
[edit].png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Bürgerentscheid as duplicate (Duplicate) and the most recent rationale was: Fairview Cemetery Plan - Fairview Cemetery, 700 Yale Boulevard Southeast, Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, NM HALS NM-6 (sheet 2 of 3).tif|later upload
Converted to regular DR per Commons:Deletion_policy#Duplicates.-- Túrelio (talk) 20:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:27, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
File:Fairview Cemetery Plot Plan - Fairview Cemetery, 700 Yale Boulevard Southeast, Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, NM HALS NM-6 (sheet 1 of 3).png
[edit].png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Bürgerentscheid as duplicate (Duplicate) and the most recent rationale was: Fairview Cemetery Plot Plan - Fairview Cemetery, 700 Yale Boulevard Southeast, Albuquerque, Bernalillo County, NM HALS NM-6 (sheet 1 of 3).tif|later upload
Converted to regular DR per Commons:Deletion_policy#Duplicates.-- Túrelio (talk) 20:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:27, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
A recent picture slightly retro-styled. No source is provided. Ghirlandajo (talk) 21:41, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:30, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This is a fan-made logo made from Genisys logo and should be replaced with an official one. 110.70.59.4 23:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- Keep This is a modification of the logo, as a transparent version of the logo is not available officially. This is useful and without a "better" alternative, should be kept. Elliot321 (talk) 04:41, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- Would this be a suitable alternative? (Source) 39.7.54.113 03:15, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Elliot321: 121.138.50.190 04:47, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- I suppose, though ideally you'd exclude the "now playing in theaters part" and have a better color scheme. Elliot321 (talk) 04:49, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- I have uploaded a new version of the logo.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 04:13, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Kept: resolved, new version uploaded. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 00:31, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
abusive on wikimedia commons - not PD Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 06:42, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- The image is tagged with a fair use claim, on that basis that it is only typography. I understand that fair use claim rules with regard to Typography are different in United States than in other countries but this usage seems to be acceptable. I hope someone with better understanding of the relevant copyright law can take a look at it. -- 109.78.201.221 17:33, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete - hardly PD-text. Anarchyte (talk • work) 07:57, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Clearly a straight forward example of something below the threshold of originality aka not creative and\or original enough to warrant copyright protection. Also in the USA ""As a general rule, typeface, typefont, lettering, calligraphy, and typographic ornamentation are not registrable (...) Typefaces cannot be protected by copyright in the United States. Tm (talk) 08:00, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: below TOO per remark of Tm. The text itself can also be considered below TOO. --Ellywa (talk) 21:26, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Painter Charles Tharp died in 1951 and per Commons:CRT/United Kingdom (life+70 years) the painting is not PD until 2022. Wcam (talk) 12:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, can be undeleted in a few months, in 2022.. --Ellywa (talk) 21:29, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
I doubt the uploader is the actual creator of a Rick Stein photo.The photo looks too professional to believe it belongs to an uploader George Ho (talk) 14:38, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- And why do you think that? The Banner (talk) 21:32, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
- Why not cite COM:PCP? It was used for reason to delete the other image, despite one "weak keep" vote. Also, I don't think any average Commons user would create an image like that. Wouldn't you? --George Ho (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- In fact what you say is that someone with a very expensive camera can not be a Wikipedia-editor. And because of that you claim to be cautious. To be true, I think that you forgot AGF in the process. The Banner (talk) 10:17, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- The image was uploaded years ago, and the copyright issue hasn't been corrected since. Furthermore, the uploader has just this image remaining and nothing else, and the uploader has no longer been a newcomer. COM:AGF is a guideline, but it's a guideline. Assuming that the uploader is fully aware of what the project expects in terms of copyright is a very hard task. We can't be sure whether the uploader and the author are the same. George Ho (talk) 14:10, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- With those arguments you can nearly empty Commons. This is a plain Bad Faith-nomination. The Banner (talk) 19:10, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- You misunderstood. This photo may not be suitable for use in Commons. I don't intend to empty the whole project, but I think I'm getting tired of arguing with you about "good faith"/"bad faith" stuff. Let's await others, shall we? George Ho (talk) 21:56, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- Do you really think that the owner of a en:Nikon D800E-camera is a hobby photographer? The article states the suggested retail price of $2999.95 in the U.S., £2399 in the UK, and €2892 in the Eurozone., that sounds like professional equipment. The Banner (talk) 23:05, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- Owner and uploader aren't the same, are they? George Ho (talk) 00:19, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
- No evidence of that. The Banner (talk) 09:48, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
- Owner and uploader aren't the same, are they? George Ho (talk) 00:19, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
- Do you really think that the owner of a en:Nikon D800E-camera is a hobby photographer? The article states the suggested retail price of $2999.95 in the U.S., £2399 in the UK, and €2892 in the Eurozone., that sounds like professional equipment. The Banner (talk) 23:05, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- You misunderstood. This photo may not be suitable for use in Commons. I don't intend to empty the whole project, but I think I'm getting tired of arguing with you about "good faith"/"bad faith" stuff. Let's await others, shall we? George Ho (talk) 21:56, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- With those arguments you can nearly empty Commons. This is a plain Bad Faith-nomination. The Banner (talk) 19:10, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- The image was uploaded years ago, and the copyright issue hasn't been corrected since. Furthermore, the uploader has just this image remaining and nothing else, and the uploader has no longer been a newcomer. COM:AGF is a guideline, but it's a guideline. Assuming that the uploader is fully aware of what the project expects in terms of copyright is a very hard task. We can't be sure whether the uploader and the author are the same. George Ho (talk) 14:10, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- In fact what you say is that someone with a very expensive camera can not be a Wikipedia-editor. And because of that you claim to be cautious. To be true, I think that you forgot AGF in the process. The Banner (talk) 10:17, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
- Why not cite COM:PCP? It was used for reason to delete the other image, despite one "weak keep" vote. Also, I don't think any average Commons user would create an image like that. Wouldn't you? --George Ho (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. It is not shown the image is uploaded by the photographer. Uploader did not comment, so deleted by COM:PRP. --Ellywa (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Explanatory board on the left can be seen clear enough to read full text. One of co-authors of the board, the Environment Agency (環境庁), was established in 1971 so the text is not yet in PD. Yasu (talk) 15:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Kept: Cropped the image to remove the copyrighted part, the remaining half could be kept. --Ellywa (talk) 21:41, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
![15:33, 6 February 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/02/06#c-VIGNERON-2021-02-06T15:33:00.000Z-File:"Morts_pour_la_patrie"_d'Anto_Carte,_1927.jpg){kind=link}
Il s'agit d'une oeuvre publique qui se trouve dans le bâtiment d'une université publique (Université de Mons). L'oeuvre appartient donc à l'Université de Mons qui a le droit d'en faire usage et de la valoriser. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MUMONS (talk • contribs) 15:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
![15:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/02/06#c-MUMONS-2021-02-06T15:48:00.000Z-File:"Morts_pour_la_patrie"_d'Anto_Carte,_1927.jpg){kind=link}
- Peu importe à qui appartient physiquement l'œuvre, les droits d'auteurs d'une œuvre appartiennent évidemment à son auteur. De même, l'Université a une certain latitude pour utiliser l'image de l'œuvre, mais cela va-t-il jusqu'à en autoriser le placement sous licence libre ? (et donc notamment en autoriser la commercialisation ?). Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 12:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- Comment According to Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Belgium#Freedom_of_panorama, Belgium has freedom of panorama for "public spaces", so the crux here is to determine whether a public university is a "public space". Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:00, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Jastrow: maybe but no idea, that's why I did this deletion request. If this file is kept, it should use the {{FoP-Belgium}} template (which is not the case right now). Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 12:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
Il s'agit également d'un monument aux morts de la Première guerre mondiale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MUMONS (talk • contribs) 17:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
![17:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/02/06#c-MUMONS-2021-02-06T17:20:00.000Z-File:"Morts_pour_la_patrie"_d'Anto_Carte,_1927.jpg){kind=link}
- @MUMONS: que ce soit un monument aux morts n'a pas la moindre importance pour déterminer les droits d'auteur et donc la légalité du placement sous licence libre sur Commons. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 12:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep {{FoP-Belgium}} applies. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:44, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. There is no freedom of panorama inside buildings that are not permanently open to the public in Belgium per COM:FOP Belgium. Can be undeleted in 2025.. --Ellywa (talk) 21:48, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
![21:48, 9 November 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/02/06#c-Ellywa-2021-11-09T21:48:00.000Z-File:"Morts_pour_la_patrie"_d'Anto_Carte,_1927.jpg){kind=link}
I do not believe this media is free with the licence correctly attributed to it. I do think this media has lost his copyright holder. but it can be find here: http://cliparts101.com/free_clipart/39707/Boy_Buried_in_Book http://clipart-library.com/clipart/n854495.htm and https://www.hiclipart.com/free-transparent-background-png-clipart-mbeqi https://www.amazon.com/o/ASIN/1411656938. but i think the licence are free as in beer but not as in speech Wvdp (talk) 16:18, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Uploader did not comment, source is not clearly indicated and based on nomination probably copyrighted. Deleted per COM:PRP. --Ellywa (talk) 21:50, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
There is no evidence that this file is GFDL or CC BY-SA 3.0 as it is marked. Especially if author is unknown ("neznamy"), these licences are improbable. Albert Horáček (talk) 20:44, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Unknown origin and unknown copyright status. Uploader did not comment, so deleted per COM:PRP. --Ellywa (talk) 21:51, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
