Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2021/04/27
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_Space_.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(42383500400).jpg){kind=link}
_(30324098098).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383499620).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383498750).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383497440).jpg){kind=link}
_(43285361165).jpg){kind=link}
_(44143064732).jpg){kind=link}
_(44143064092).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383492990).jpg){kind=link}
_0166.jpg){kind=link}
![129 File:Ray Palaviccino "Grande de la Nueva Ola". Edición Especial del Diario "Las Ültimas Noticias de Santiago de Chile". (Compilación del año 2009).png](#File:Ray_Palaviccino_"Grande_de_la_Nueva_Ola"._Edición_Especial_del_Diario_"Las_Ültimas_Noticias_de_Santiago_de_Chile"._(Compilación_del_año_2009).png){kind=link}
_Niki.PNG){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
-fr.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_logo.svg){kind=link}
_0167.jpg){kind=link}
_in_1988.jpg){kind=link}
.jpeg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
copyvio: https://www.hautsdefrance.fr/elu/bertrand-xavier/ Cheep (talk) 00:11, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted. No evidence of claimed license seen at source site. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 14:12, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
copyvio: https://www.letemps.ch/monde/face-macron-droite-lhypothese-anne-hidalgo Cheep (talk) 00:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted. No evidence of claimed license seen at source site. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 14:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
I don't want to share this image Duynv236 (talk) 14:04, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
I don't want to share this image Duynv236 (talk) 14:13, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
delete please 14.162.36.104 04:39, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted, prompt uploader request. (Listing it once is sufficient.) -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 14:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Photo of book cover, Prabhat book house's logo is visible. Kiran Gopi (Talk to me..) 06:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted, false claims, false license. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 14:26, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
No evidence of free license at the claimed source (archived here). In fact, at the bottom of the site, there reads "copyright © fukuyama kazuhito all rights reserved". Howhontanozaz (talk) 07:32, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted per nom. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 14:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Duplicate with watermarck of File:La chiesa di Fusara.jpg Threecharlie (talk) 08:34, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted per nom. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Screenshot from television Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 12:06, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Not own work, taken from Internet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laz (talk • contribs) 12:21, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Speedy delete, violates COM:CSD#F4, License review NOT passed: Came via Facebook; their Terms of Use are incompatible with publishing here. Low resolution. No camera metadata. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:27, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 18:26, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello - I sincerely apologize but this was not the image that was meant to be uploaded. It is unprofessional and does not match the intended scope of the article I was constructing (it was only a practice image). I would be very happy if you could please delete this image - I will only ask one time and not make this a recurring request. I sincerely apologize for any issue this may cause and hope to hear from you. Thank you very much! KD1212 (talk) 21:46, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim (talk) 21:46, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
copyvio, not own work MB (talk) 16:35, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 08:06, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
авторское право не истекло. Copyright hasn't expired Jaguarnik (talk) 02:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. --Yann (talk) 15:04, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Out of COM:Scope Mormegil (talk) 15:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 16:32, 30 April 2021 UTC: CSD F10 (personal photos out of COM:SCOPE --Krdbot 20:44, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Werner & Mertz (talk · contribs)
[edit]copyrighted logos, permission required
- File:Frosch logo.svg
- File:Comicfrosch der Marke Frosch auf einer Wiese.jpg
- File:Erklärung zu Nachhaltigkeitsaspekten bei ausgewählten Produkten der Marke Frosch.jpg
- File:Chronologie der Werner & Mertz Recyclat-Initiative Status April 2020.jpg
- File:Eine beispielhafte Auswahl veschiedener Produkte von Werner & Mertz.jpg
- File:Kreislaufführung von Kunststoffverpackungen.jpg
- File:Eine beispielhafte Auswahl verschiedener Produkte der Marke Frosch.jpg
Krd 05:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:39, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
- Restored per ticket permission. --Krd 10:11, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Its adirajput (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE.
Ahmadtalk 11:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:39, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of scope.
- File:Suman shekhar nawada hh.jpg
- File:Suman shekhar nawada ss.jpg
- File:Suman shekhar nawada.jpg
- File:Suman Shekhar Nawada.jpg
- File:Dayal Public School Nawada Rangoli.jpg
- File:Dayal Public School Nawada Teacher's day Celebration.jpg
- File:Dayal Public School Nawada Teachers.jpg
- File:Dayal Public School Nawada Assembly Ground.jpg
- File:Dayal public school.jpg
- File:BY SUMAN SHEKHAR NWD.jpg
FDMS 4 00:15, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Delete all as heavily self-promotional...being dumped as galleries into articles with appearance of spam for his Facebook/etc. DMacks (talk) 05:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)- See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Suman Shekhar Nawada.jpg DMacks (talk) 05:51, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:05, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://media2.intoday.in/indiatoday/images/stories/ishan-story_647_011316012357.jpg.
- File:Ishan Kishan In Gujrat Lions Jersey.jpeg
- File:Ishan Kishan With U 19 worldcup trophy.jpg
- File:Indian U19 at High Commission Of India in Bangladesh on 67th Republic Day.jpg
- File:Ishan kishan against Nepal U19 in U19 Worldcup.jpg
- File:Indian National Under 19 Cricket team member and supporting staffs.jpg
- File:India's Biggest and Longest Tiranga at Ranchi.jpg
- File:Ishan Kishan Captain Under 19 Cricket team India.jpg
- File:Ishan kishan U-19 captain of indian team.jpg
- File:Ishan Kishan Indian U-19 Captain while batting.jpg
- File:Nawada.SumanShekhar.jpg
- File:Sumanshekharnawada.jpg
- File:Nawada Bihar.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:10, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Original photographer(s) must confirm licenses via COM:OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 15:35, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Dubious own-work claims. Most of these are watermarked by Apna Nawada, a commercial website. The ones that aren't watermarked can be traced back to the website's other social media accounts, like File:Prajatantra chowk by s shekhar.jpg being available on Facebook prior to the Commons upload date. The uploade's talk page is filled with deletion notices, which does not provide much confidence. COM:PCP applies.
- File:Nawada Railway Station.jpg
- File:DSJ Chhatra Sangharsh Rally.jpg
- File:Nawada Railway Station Captured by suman shekhar.jpg
- File:Dayal public School Nawada Building.jpg
- File:Church nawada by suman.jpg
- File:Church nawada.jpg
- File:St josheph school nawada.jpg
- File:Prajatantra chowk by s shekhar.jpg
- File:Indore stedium nawada.jpg
- File:Par nawada gaya road pic by suman shekhar.jpg
- File:Jama masjid sabji bazar nawada pic by s shekhar.jpg
✗plicit 13:15, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:40, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Really poor quality, many better alternatives in Category:Benzoic acid. Leyo 09:08, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. File:Benzoic acid 200.svg is a good replacement. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 06:19, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:55, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Poor quality, non-symmetric double bond, better alternatives in Category:Tetrachloroethylene. Leyo 09:12, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; pixelated. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 07:02, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:55, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
per COM:PENIS
- File:Sperme sur le visage pour Jacky.jpg
- File:Éjaculation.faciale et plug anal pour Jacky.jpg
- File:Éjaculation faciale et plug anal pour Jacky.jpg
- File:Plug anal, string et éjaculation faciale.jpg
大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 15:18, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Worthless, poor quality, redundant and out of scope. AshFriday (talk) 01:03, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:41, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
Low quality and not of any obvious use to the project.
Herby talk thyme 13:15, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:35, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:39, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Should be moved as en:Help:Table to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:44, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:46, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:48, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rpuentedelavega (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:50, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Used in vanity draft. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:52, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:01, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:35, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused text diagram, should be in wiki-markup if needed, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:01, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:35, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Team Fitts (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused charts without context, little educational value, out of scope.
- File:Figure 1b.JPG
- File:Table 1 - Baseline + All Days.JPG
- File:Pre-Study Survey Figure 2.JPG
- File:Pre-Study Survey Figure 1b.JPG
- File:Pre-survey.JPG
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused tiny bookcover image, unusable, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:20, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused low-res diagram without context, little educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:05, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:20, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Text table, should be in wiki-table format if needed, out of scope. No meaningful use. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:06, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:20, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused personal photos, COM:WEBHOST, no educational value, out of scope.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Historical images, missing original author, source, date, and permission.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:08, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Scan or photo of photo, missing original author, source, date, and permission. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused screenshot, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by МЦ Премиум (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused posters, no educational value, out of scope.
- File:Почётная грамота Э.А. Абрамова.jpeg
- File:Почётная грамота Ф.Р. Банщикова.jpeg
- File:Почётная грамота Банщикова Ф.Р.jpeg
- File:Premium gramoti priznanie Abramov.jpeg
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:15, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Historical photos, missing original author, source, date, and permission.
- File:Preot Mihailescu Dumitru - in centrul imaginii.JPG
- File:Punerea pietrei fundamentale a bisericii din Andolina - 1942.JPG
- File:Construind biserica din Andolina - 1942.JPG
- File:Preot paroh Mihailescu Dumitru.JPG
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:16, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:06, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused low-res diagrams without context, little educational value, out of scope.
- File:Prepare and Source FS 1 no metrics 3.jpg
- File:Prepare and Source FS 3.pdf
- File:Prepare and Source FS 2.png
- File:Prepare and Source FS 1.jpg
- File:Recruiter Productivity Future State - FINAL 8.28.14.pdf
- File:RC Interview Process Mapping 1.pdf
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:06, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused logos and screenshot, no educational value, out of scope.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:06, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused screenshot, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:18, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:06, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Pulcro sodom (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused promotional photos of non-notable band, no educational value, out of scope.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:20, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:20, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:20, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused photo of non-notable and unidentified team, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:20, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Shiltarnic (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused photos of non-notable persons, no educational value, out of scope.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:21, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused photo of non-notable person, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Alonsodelfin (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal photos, COM:WEBHOST, no educational value, out of scope.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:06, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused low-res diagram without context, little educational value, out of scope. And not own works as per discription.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:25, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by ReemNBsaiso (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal photos, no educational value, out of scope.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Promotional photo of non-notable band, no educational value, out of scope. One only used on userpage of user without meaningful edits.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:29, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:22, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused screenshot, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:22, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused logo, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:31, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:22, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Peetersalt (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused photos of non-notable persons, no educational value, out of scope.
- File:Prijesh kannan payyanur annur.jpg
- File:Prijesh kannan payyanur.jpg
- File:Prijesh kannan with pinarayi.jpg
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:31, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:22, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused personal drawing, COM:WEBHOST, little educational use, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:32, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:22, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused logo, no educational value, out of scope. And above COM:TOO.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:22, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Hanonimas (talk) 18:46, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Comment what was the mistake? Why are you only listing for deletion 6 years later? -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 13:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep you cannot revoke a licence once given, especially so long after uploading. If it was a few days then it might be considered out of courtesy. Ww2censor (talk) 22:00, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; Not a recent upload. --Wdwd (talk) 14:09, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Hanonimas (talk) 18:47, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
- Comment what was the mistake? Why are you only listing for deletion 6 years later? -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 13:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep you cannot revoke a licence once given, especially so long after uploading. If it was a few days then it might be considered out of courtesy. Ww2censor (talk) 22:00, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; Not a recent upload/file in use. --Wdwd (talk) 14:09, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of scope. Artwork without educational use. SCP-2000 01:31, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 14:11, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
عکس برای من است لطفا حذفش کنید Sleeping Beauty9 (talk) 20:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete Unused personal picture. Out of scope. --Ganímedes (talk) 23:41, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
حذف عکسی که ذخبره شده از پنل کاربری Sleeping Beauty9 (talk) 09:57, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination: uploader request, unused photo. --Ankry (talk) 12:19, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Second picture is copyrighted : no COM:FOP in South Korea. Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:10, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Keep the original version, Delete offending version which was uploaded causing the problem, so tagged.--BevinKacon (talk) 16:37, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
File contains a copyvio - File:Daegu Skyline.jpg (deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/Photos of cities by ASDFGHJ). This must be reverted to the decent version and undergo revdel or revision deletion to prevent another undo to the infringing revision. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 14:43, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
File contains a copyvio - File:Gwangju Skyline.jpg (deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/Photos of cities by ASDFGHJ). This must be reverted to the decent version and undergo revdel or revision deletion to prevent another undo to the infringing revision (like what User:Radiant Urbanism unexplainably did to this and several other SoKor city collage images). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 14:47, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
File contains a copyvio - File:Daejeon Skyline.jpg (deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/Photos of cities by ASDFGHJ). This must be reverted to the decent version and undergo revdel or revision deletion to prevent another undo to the infringing revision (like what User:Radiant Urbanism unexplainably did to this and several other SoKor city collage images). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:51, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 14:49, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Belarus A1Cafel (talk) 03:01, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Belarus#Freedom_of_panorama. --Wdwd (talk) 14:53, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work of the uploader. jdx Re: 04:46, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio, COM:DW. --Wdwd (talk) 14:55, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation, uploader does not seem to actually have permission from source to publish file. Uploader's last remaining contribution. Film Enthusiast (talk) 05:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete The Boston Globe attributes this image to "ANDY KROPA/INVISION/AP/FILE", so we need evidence they have released the image under a free licence. Ww2censor (talk) 22:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: missing permission. --Wdwd (talk) 14:56, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ferran.Capdevila (talk · contribs)
[edit]Appears to be from the same photoshoot as pho Rus here: https://www.instagram.com/p/CHQlZmHj34L/?igshid=16q2uymz6q0ps. Insta/web quality photos missing EXIF data. Likely not the uploader’s work.
Ytoyoda (talk) 05:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 14:57, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of scope – not educationally useful (unused personal image[s] of uploader). Commons is neither a social media site nor a private photo album. Микола Василечко (talk) 06:44, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 14:58, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by SosyalDemokrat (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope: unused alternate history / fictional election maps.
HyperGaruda (talk) 18:33, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —howcheng {chat} 19:44, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by SosyalDemokrat (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope: unused fictitious/alt-hist election results (why are most southeastern states missing?), some of which are even impossible give a purpose on a Wikimedia project due to random character strings for descriptions.
- File:411d34r5t6y5hgbvf cx.png
- File:Asd123yuı.svg
- File:EEEL8JOKLÖ.png
- File:Alternative Electoral College Map 1960.png
HyperGaruda (talk) 06:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:00, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 126.152.118.33 as Copyvio (Copyvio) No reason or source given. BriefEdits (talk) 07:00, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no reason for deletion given. --Wdwd (talk) 15:01, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Bruvora as Speedy (db) and the most recent rationale was: -g7|rationale=copyrightviolation
Converted to regular DR as no evidece for copyvio provided. However, the image seems to be out of COM:SCOPE. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:46, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no evidence of copyvio given. --Yasu (talk) 15:22, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
I highly doubt that this is the "own work" of the uploader because of the Hungarian Dragon Boat Federation logo at the top-right corner. Needs permission from them via COM:OTRS. Howhontanozaz (talk) 07:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
fake, the file is not the true arms of Sabuzedo, this town don't have arms 2A01:E0A:76:CED0:6594:942F:8C26:E72A 08:40, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: private sketch, unused -> Oos. --Wdwd (talk) 15:06, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Likely a screenshot. -- Túrelio (talk) 09:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:07, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
McOptic has changed its Logo - this one is not valid anymore. Nrohner (talk) 09:24, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Historic logos are not deleted. --Leyo 11:36, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Speedy keep per Leyo. Wikimedia Commons is not restricted to most recent versions of everything only; history is also in scope. If this file was in scope when uploaded, it still is. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: per Leyo. --Wdwd (talk) 15:08, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
McOptic has changed its Logo - this one is not valid anymore. Nrohner (talk) 09:25, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Historic logos are not deleted. --Leyo 11:41, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: per Leyo. --Wdwd (talk) 15:08, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
already uploaded as File:Symbolbild Hartz IV.jpg Loominade (talk) 11:11, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:09, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
I just imported it from enwiki, but then found out that the file already exists here at File:Stanley M. Garn racial classification.png Stevenliuyi (talk) 11:27, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:10, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
unused screenshoot, doesn't seem to be in a scope Pibwl (talk) 11:29, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:10, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
{{BadJPG}}, replaced by File:McOptic Logo.svg uploaded by the same user. Leyo 11:32, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:11, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Copyvio: this is the original photograph from which this one is a derivate, with a CC license not suitable for Commons. The MECON website just appears to have used an edited version of the photograph, used in the social media of this person, since at least as early as 2014. Frodar (talk) 11:34, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:12, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
advertising -- Deadstar (msg) 12:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:13, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
This is an artwork by en:Chris Levine. No evidence of permission. Celia Homeford (talk) 12:59, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:15, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
_Space_.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Space_.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
- File:Wave Form Dish Other 01 300 ppi H1333 W2000.jpg
- File:Inner (Deep) Space Exhibition 073 300 ppi H1333 W2000.jpg
_Space_Exhibition_073_300_ppi_H1333_W2000.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
The metadata says the image is copyrighted by Luke Walker, which also seems to be confirmed by almost identical or identical images in the media, e.g. https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/gallery/chris-levine-frieze-london-exhibition?image=5d139027b3005e57847c4769. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_Space_.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:16, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
_Space_.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Holiday snap of unimportant female. Not used in any wikiproject. 62.216.207.133 09:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep --Achim (talk) 19:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Kept, apparently this is considered a "Quality picture" (Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives March 25 2015), so it isn't completely useless. Thuresson (talk) 18:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
very low quality Discostu (talk) 12:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, blurry and bad composition. The subject has plenty of photos in Category:Jerry Do-It-Together. Thuresson (talk) 18:06, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
See Commons:Currency#United Kingdom. I know Jersey is not officially part of the UK, but the law there is much the same as in the UK. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:01, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted per nomination. See also Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Jersey. Thuresson (talk) 18:11, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project or in tabular format on Commons if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted. Not in use, may have some connection to en:Draft:Grey Sailor. Thuresson (talk) 18:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:55, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, this upload is this user's only contribution to any Wikimedia project. Probably selfie. Not used in any Wikimedia Project. Thuresson (talk) 18:36, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 1989 as Logo. Unknown country of origin. Likely out-of-scope as an unused logo. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 18:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted. Not in use; smaller version of File:Tbz logo.jpg. Thuresson (talk) 18:39, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Previously published in October 2019 (https://www.instagram.com/p/B3pQ5eBjklC/?hl=en). Needs permission from photographer (not the subject) via COM:OTRS. Howhontanozaz (talk) 19:24, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
The reference url provided by Howhontanozaz is non-existen and the claim is irrelevant as the original owner of the file has provided it to Wikimedia. (DW78832 (talk) 19:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC))
Howhontanozaz Your claim to have the photo deleted is invalid as the Instagram link is not real and the claim is irrelevant, as the copyright owner has provided the original full image to Wikimedia Commons.(DW78832 (talk) 19:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC))
- To whoever closes this request, please note that the Instagram user deleted this particular post minutes after I filed this request. As stated above, the Instagram post was dated October 2019. If you look at the file in question, in the metadata, you can see the FBMD data indicating that it originated from either Facebook or Instagram. Who would you trust, a diligent Commons-contributor or a user with little to no Commons contributions before this debacle? I trust in the wisdom of this community. Howhontanozaz (talk) 19:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- In fact, the Instagram user in question still has the photo used as his profile photo https://www.instagram.com/thepeterbaykov which I also took a screenshot of because apparently, both archive.org and archive.is cannot archive instagram feeds. Screenshot can be found here https://imgur.com/a/4P9AKaH. Howhontanozaz (talk) 20:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Howhontanozaz Your statement is completely untrue and regardless of your angle here, you have absolutely no prove to support your claim about the link - it's invalid. The matter is not about "trust", but solid facts to support it, which your argument lacks indeed. (DW78832 (talk) 20:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC))
As the original owner of the copyright of this photo, I have granted the necessary permissions to Wikimedia Commons to display it on the platform with the means necessary. The Instagram link provided by Howhontanozaz is invalid which makes the claim unreasonable. There's nothing that proves your statement and such "debacles" are groundless without reference materials to prove your point. (Pbaykov (talk) 20:18, 27 April 2021 (UTC))
- @Pbaykov: If you are the copyright holder, then please follow the instructions outlined in COM:OTRS. Howhontanozaz (talk) 20:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Pbaykov: One question though, you share the same name as the subject of the photograph. If I assume that you are Mr. Baykov, please explain how you became the copyright holder of the photo. I can see your hands in the photo thus I can conclude that thiz isn't a selfie. Please take note that the copyright holder is usually the person who clicked the button unless its a work-for-hire. Please elaborate. Howhontanozaz (talk) 20:39, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
There is an OTRS email received for “File:Peter Baykov Red Carpet.jpg” but not processed yet, ticket:2021042710013942. --Mussklprozz (talk) 13:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, can be undeleted when and if the ticket is properly approved by OTRS. Thuresson (talk) 18:47, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
file for vandalism, out of scope Lesless (talk) 19:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 12:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused text diagram, no context, should be in wiki-markup if needed, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 12:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused flow diagram without context, little educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 12:03, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Thumbnail image with border, likely screengrab and unusable. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:34, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 12:03, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused logo, no educational value, out of scope. And above COM:TOO. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:35, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 12:03, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Dubious if really own work, mainly due to low resolution and absence of metadata. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy delete I agree. It has been present in the internet since at least 2010, 3 years before been uploaded here. --C messier (talk) 07:51, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Gestumblindi (talk) 22:46, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Metadata indicates that the copyright holder is "State of Connecticut/House Democrats". The flickr account that this is sourced from does not appear to be the copyright holder. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:53, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Can't really argue against that. Curbon7 (talk) 01:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Gestumblindi (talk) 22:47, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Originally I tagged it with no permission, but it was reverted by an admin. However, this was previously inquired at Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2021/04#File:Val Valentino.jpg, where another admin said that the talk page permission is insufficient. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
This DR also concerns its derivative, File:Val Valentino (cropped).jpg, derived by @Sturm: . JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Ping @Veverve: who told me about the insufficiency of that talk page permission, and @DarwIn: who reverted my no permission warning tag. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:00, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete, becaus and official OTRS is needed and I doubt the author had the right to licence this picture in the first place. Veverve (talk) 06:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- @JWilz12345: I apologize for the reversion, but this is the correct procedure, indeed, because at the time that kind of "permission" was indeed accepted here (unfortunately). I'm neutral on the DR, since no evidence that the permission may be false was presented, though it is true that it is not really evidence of anything, and could well be forged.-- Darwin Ahoy! 16:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- @DarwIn: and just a few addition, the indicated permission is from the magician himself, who is the subject of the photo. There's insufficient info whether he holds the copyright (copyright transferred from the photographer?) or not. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- @JWilz12345: Yes, you are right, everything is wrong there, it's unfortunate it was not challenged at the time, when it was easy to correct if done in good faith. I agree with the deletion.-- Darwin Ahoy! 16:44, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- @DarwIn: and just a few addition, the indicated permission is from the magician himself, who is the subject of the photo. There's insufficient info whether he holds the copyright (copyright transferred from the photographer?) or not. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:34, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Potential copyvio. Low image resolution and missing exifdata. COM:OTRS permission is needed. SCP-2000 04:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:34, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
This issue has been resolved, should the request be deleted of archived? WQUlrich (talk) 05:06, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Dubious. The image doesn't match the title. It was derived from Pinterest. The link doesn't take you to there. WQUlrich (talk) 07:36, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Bingo
I was able to find and upload copy of the actual painting. [1] WQUlrich (talk) 04:34, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Aureli-Romance.jpg){kind=link}
- PS: I was also able to identify what the image really is (Here, from the same gallery, [2]), so I guess this request is cancelled. WQUlrich (talk) 04:52, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 17:34, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_(42383500400).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383500400).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope: tourist photo; there is a better one without a tourist: File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (17) (44143076332).jpg JopkeB (talk) 08:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_(44143076332).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383500400).jpg){kind=link}
- Keep Again the same reashed "rationale" taken from and rejected in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (365) (8174906415).jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (324) (8175144634).jpg. In scope and being (or not) a tourist photo is indifferent to it being in scope or not. Tm (talk) 12:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep No valid reason given in nomination. A subjective claim that a "tourist photo" (whatever that is) is "worse", and sufficiently worse that it justifies deletion is to ignore the scale given added by having a figure there. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - No valid reason, not out of scope. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 16:11, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
_(8174906415).jpg){kind=link}
_(8175144634).jpg){kind=link}
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 17:34, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_(42383500400).jpg){kind=link}
_(30324098098).jpg){kind=link}
_(30324098098).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope, tourist photo; no added value to for instance File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (12) (42383481160).jpg JopkeB (talk) 08:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_(42383481160).jpg){kind=link}
_(30324098098).jpg){kind=link}
- Keep Again the same reashed "rationale" taken from and rejected in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (365) (8174906415).jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (324) (8175144634).jpg. In scope and being (or not) a tourist photo is indifferent to it being in scope or not. Tm (talk) 12:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - No valid reason, not out of scope. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 16:12, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_(30324098098).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383499620).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383499620).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope: tourist photo; there is a better one without a tourist: File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (16) (42383501170).jpg JopkeB (talk) 08:16, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_(42383501170).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383499620).jpg){kind=link}
- Keep Again the same reashed "rationale" taken from and rejected in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (365) (8174906415).jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (324) (8175144634).jpg. In scope and being (or not) a tourist photo is indifferent to it being in scope or not. Tm (talk) 12:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - No valid reason, not out of scope. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 16:13, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_(42383499620).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383498750).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383498750).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope: tourist photo; there is a better one without a tourist: File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (29) (42383496910).jpg JopkeB (talk) 08:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_(42383496910).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383498750).jpg){kind=link}
- Keep Again the same reashed "rationale" taken from and rejected in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (365) (8174906415).jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (324) (8175144634).jpg. In scope and being (or not) a tourist photo is indifferent to it being in scope or not. Tm (talk) 12:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - No valid reason, not out of scope. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 16:13, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_(42383498750).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383497440).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383497440).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope: tourist photo; no added value to File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (12) (42383481160).jpg JopkeB (talk) 08:26, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_(42383497440).jpg){kind=link}
- Keep Again the same reashed "rationale" taken from and rejected in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (365) (8174906415).jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (324) (8175144634).jpg. In scope and being (or not) a tourist photo is indifferent to it being in scope or not. Tm (talk) 12:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - No valid reason, not out of scope. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 16:14, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_(42383497440).jpg){kind=link}
_(43285361165).jpg){kind=link}
_(43285361165).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope: tourist photo; there is a better one without a tourist: File:Kasteel Hoensbroek (16) (42383501170).jpg JopkeB (talk) 08:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_(43285361165).jpg){kind=link}
- Keep Again the same reashed "rationale" taken from and rejected in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (365) (8174906415).jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (324) (8175144634).jpg. In scope and being (or not) a tourist photo is indifferent to it being in scope or not. Tm (talk) 12:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - No valid reason, not out of scope. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 16:15, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_(43285361165).jpg){kind=link}
_(44143064732).jpg){kind=link}
_(44143064732).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope: selfie JopkeB (talk) 09:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_(44143064732).jpg){kind=link}
- Keep Again the same reashed "rationale" taken from and rejected in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (365) (8174906415).jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (324) (8175144634).jpg. In scope and being (or not) a tourist photo is indifferent to it being in scope or not. Tm (talk) 12:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_(44143064732).jpg){kind=link}
_(44143064092).jpg){kind=link}
_(44143064092).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope: selfie JopkeB (talk) 09:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_(44143064092).jpg){kind=link}
- Keep Again the same reashed "rationale" taken from and rejected in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (365) (8174906415).jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (324) (8175144634).jpg. In scope and being (or not) a tourist photo is indifferent to it being in scope or not. Tm (talk) 12:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_(44143064092).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383492990).jpg){kind=link}
_(42383492990).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope: selfie JopkeB (talk) 09:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_(42383492990).jpg){kind=link}
- Keep Again the same reashed "rationale" taken from and rejected in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (365) (8174906415).jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nederlands openlucht museum arnhem (324) (8175144634).jpg. In scope and being (or not) a tourist photo is indifferent to it being in scope or not. Tm (talk) 12:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - No valid reason, not out of scope or a 'real' selfie. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 16:17, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_(42383492990).jpg){kind=link}
File:SLNSW 28711 State Theatre Duel in the Sun with Jennifer Jones Gregory Peck and Joseph Cotten.jpg
[edit]
The photo is PD but the photographed posters probably are not. Discostu (talk) 09:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
which can be translated toTenzij anders wordt aangegeven, is de informatie die je op deze site vindt, vrij van rechten. De informatie mag kosteloos en mits bronvermelding voor persoonlijk gebruik en niet-commerciële doeleinden worden aangewend. Wens je informatie (teksten of beelden) te reproduceren, te bedelen of op enige andere manier ter beschikking te stellen, dan moet er eerst toestemming gevraagd worden aan het stadsbestuur van Bree.
Unless otherwise specified, the information you find on this site is free of rights. The information may be used free of charge and provided the source is acknowledged for personal use and non-commercial purposes. If you wish to reproduce, beg or make available information (texts or images) in any other way, permission must first be requested from the city council of Bree.
- File:De zaal van de Zeepziederij.jpg
- File:De binnenkant van de Zeepziederij.jpg
- File:De buitenkant van De Zeepziederij.jpg
- File:De foyer van De Zeepziederij.jpg
Howhontanozaz (talk) 13:24, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Not own work. see File:Francolinus francolinus, Azerbaijan.jpg 4nn1l2 (talk) 13:42, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Also File:دراج سیاه آبپخش 1.jpg 4nn1l2 (talk) 14:26, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
The orginal version doesn't have our specified resulation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohalamin (talk • contribs) 13:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Dubious own work: small size, user upload history 4nn1l2 (talk) 13:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
No COM:FOP in Iran 4nn1l2 (talk) 13:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Very probably a copyvio. The image is an ad for two podcasters, published by the Norwegian NRK. The orginal is found here: https://radio.nrk.no/podkast/jonas_og_henrik Note the NRK logo. Asav | Talk 13:52, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:36, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Small web resolution. Seen elsewhere online eg [3]. Majority of other uploads by user have been deleted as copyright violations. Note: Image currently in use in multiple projects. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 13:53, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:45, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation. Flagging it for views. It is it above or below the the Threshold of Originality? It's a Satellite TV Channel based in Lebanon. No guidance on Commons on TOO in Lebanon. Headlock0225 (talk) 14:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:TOO. --Missvain (talk) 17:48, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
No COM:FOP in Iran 4nn1l2 (talk) 14:25, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
@4nn1l2: the source and all details of its license is provided. Should not be deleted.(Rohalamin) Rohalamin (talk) 11:34, 28 April 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohalamin (talk • contribs) 04:51, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:48, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
wrong licensing -Zai- (talk) 14:34, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- @-Zai-: Could you please clarify why the license is incorrect? At the company web site there is a chat function and the representative I communicated with confirmed that it is licensed under a Creative Commons license. (Note: I didn't upload this image). Thuresson (talk) 18:24, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Thuresson: Ah, alright. -Zai- (talk) 18:25, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 17:48, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Went back and added the copyright tag. Also attempted to switch file from JPG to SVG to fit logo criteria, but was getting an error message. Ended up creating separate SVG upload for the logo. Am currently working on draft of Field Day Records Wiki page. Brittygriffy (talk) 15:25, 27 April 27 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:48, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Both images, which were squeezed into one, were probably not created by the commons user. At least for the right photo, according to this source, an author can be given who clearly does not point to the Commons uploader (-> "MP picture from national assembly website"). The left image should be deleted due to COM:PCP. Mosbatho (talk) 14:38, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:48, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_0166.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_0166.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Non-free graphics above COM:TOO US. H.Wolfgang (talk) 14:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_0166.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:49, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_0166.jpg){kind=link}
File:Ray Palaviccino "Grande de la Nueva Ola". Edición Especial del Diario "Las Ültimas Noticias de Santiago de Chile". (Compilación del año 2009).png
[edit].png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Sorry, but it seems a bit far-fetched to me that the uploader is the creator of all the photos shown on that collage. Mosbatho (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:49, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from poster. Should be blanked to keep. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:49, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:55, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:49, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by AntiCompositeNumber as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Non-free graphics above COM:TOO US. Maybe over the threshold of originality, but there are simple letters, and protected elements are pretty small. The composition as a whole may be original enough, of course, Anyway, it probably merits a deletion request, instead of speedy deletion. Strakhov (talk) 16:24, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The graphics behind the New York text (the Niagara Falls drawing, the mountains behind the words, and the NYC skyline drawing) are above the threshold of originality in the US. Works by the NY state government are not automatically PD. The size of the graphics is immaterial, as the license plate is clearly the focus of the image. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:54, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Personal image, out of scope Gyrostat (talk) 16:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:55, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Personal image, out of scope Gyrostat (talk) 16:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:55, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete Uploader is not the copyright holder of the material, and has no rights to release. Hammersoft (talk) 17:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:55, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete Uploader is not the copyright holder of the material, and has no rights to release. Hammersoft (talk) 17:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:55, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
copyvio: https://www.insidesport.co/ipl-moneyball-rishabh-pant-the-rising-star/ Zaxxon0 (talk) 06:09, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:40, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
non-free, taken from Getty Images, on sites such as https://www.cricbuzz.com/cricket-news/107180/the-making-of-rishabh-pant Lugnuts (talk) 10:12, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Deleted -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:45, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
not taken by the uploader, obvious professional image taken from elsewhere Lugnuts (talk) 18:40, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:59, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Risk of copyright violation, unlikely that the YouTube channel owns the rights to this photo. Crop of a larger image published in a Tweet by the International Cricket Council, dated before the YouTube video.[4] Photo has appeared in two newspaper sites, both dated before the YouTube video.[5][6] Verbcatcher (talk) 03:21, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Also delete the cropped version File:Rishabh Pant (cropped).jpg Verbcatcher (talk) 03:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Far from realistic representation of no real educational purpose or value. Glorious 93 (talk) 18:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:04, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Architectural plans for a future stadium which belong... to its architect. At the same time, I'm not really sure if there's also with the lack of FOP in Greece here. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:04, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Architectural plans for a future stadium which belong... to its architect. At the same time, I'm not really sure if there's also with the lack of FOP in Greece here. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:04, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Unless the original uploader is indeed the original photographer here, it looks to me more like some scanned material from some (old) newspaper. Possibility of copyrights infringement as a result. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:11, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused poor image of Eiffel Tower, unusable and out of scope. And likely not own work: scan of photo. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:11, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:15, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_Niki.PNG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Niki.PNG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_Niki.PNG){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_Niki.PNG){kind=link}
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:24, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:25, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:27, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:31, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Sports logo; doesn't appear to be self-created. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:27, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:28, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
File:Quadrado Branco bordado de vermelho com uma figura olimpica grega e 1925 - vector remake.svg
[edit]
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:34, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:35, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:37, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:40, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:46, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:51, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:53, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:55, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:06, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:11, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:26, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Achim55 as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G10
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as this image seems to be useful and in scope. The current description could be reduced to what is actually shown in the image. -- Túrelio (talk) 20:15, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete: Not own work: [7], [8]. --Achim (talk) 20:27, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- ok, that's a new rationale. Delete. --Túrelio (talk) 20:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- ok, that's a new rationale.
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:27, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:16, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:29, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Well, it seems that a screen was photographed here when the pictured gentleman was seen. As such, it is a COM:DW. Moreover, with this image an educational goals seem to be achievable, as such COM:PS is to be applied. Mosbatho (talk) 20:21, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:29, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:24, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:27, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:29, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:31, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:32, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Clearly a photograph of a TV screen. Unlikely that the broadcast is freely licensed. Ytoyoda (talk) 20:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
-fr.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
-fr.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
-fr.svg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
-fr.svg){kind=link}
Of far too low quality in order to be of any real educational purpose or use. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:52, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:53, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Thithiesha (talk · contribs)
[edit]Web photos and/or screenshots unlikely to be uploader's own work.
- File:Shimron.jpg
- File:Axar Rajeshbai Patel.jpg
- File:Adam Zampa.jpg
- File:Lasith Embuldeniya.jpg
- File:Chris Woakes.jpg
Ytoyoda (talk) 20:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:31, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 21:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:31, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too much similarity with the original logo of the club in order to fall out of copyrights. Glorious 93 (talk) 21:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:31, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Croatian book covers
[edit]
- File:Ankilozantni.jpg
- File:Ivo_Jajić._Fizijatrijsko-reumatološka_propedeutika._Zagreb,_Medicinska_naklada,_1994,_1-242..png
- File:Klinička reumatoalogija.jpg
- File:Jajić Ivo. Specijalna fizikalna medicina. Zagreb, Školska knjiga 1983, 1-151..png
- File:Jajić Ivo i sur. Lumbalni bolni sindrom. Zagreb, Školska knjiga, 1984, 1-207..jpg
- File:JaJić Ivo. Specijalna fizikalna medicina. Zagreb, Školska knjiga 1983, 1-151. 1983.jpg
copyvio, book cover rights usually belong to the graphics designers of the book Ivi104 (talk) 21:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:32, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Far too low resolution in order to be considered as own work. At the same time, the absence of metadata doesn't really help here. Glorious 93 (talk) 21:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:32, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Screenshot for a bug report, for local use on Wikipedia. The bug report is over, and I'd like to request deletion of this file as the uploader. EpicPupper (talk) 21:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:33, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
No photoproject etc.; article should be moved to Wikipedia, see: https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Museum_Deli_Serdang Brackenheim (talk) 21:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hi @Brackenheim, This page is for a portal for museum collection that Wikimedia Indonesia has digitized. The wikipedia page for the museum itself is exist. If you think that it looks like an article, may be we can simplify it. This page is not the only one in commons, you can also see the page Commons:Nationalmuseum Stockholm Harditaher (talk) 05:29, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- Hello Harditaher, then of course it's something totaly different. But Wikimedia Indonesia has to be mentioned as a digitization partner; like Wikimedia Sweden in the National Museum Stockholm. -- Brackenheim (talk) 09:07, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- The following discussion is closed, and will be archived soon.
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 23:33, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Appears to be a trail camera image with the timestamp and logo crudely edited out. May not be uploader's own work. Boylarva99 (talk) 21:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
No FOP for 2D artistic works in the UK, and this is not permanently situated. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:32, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete these 1999 Israeli stamps are copyright for 50 years after issuance, so need to be deleted until 2050 per the copyright rules shown here Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Israel#Stamps. Ww2censor (talk) 21:38, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- As you can see in the dedication sign at the bottom, this is a special gift that was given to the artist Yhudit Greenspan and is located at her home. this is not an art piece, so to the best of my knowledge, it doesn't have any copyrights. עמית אבידן (talk) 14:01, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Comment עמית אבידן: who is the designer of the stamps? Who is the photographer of the framed items? We require the permission of both parties because both are copyright holders of their work. Can that be provided? Ww2censor (talk) 18:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- the designer of the stamps is Tuvia Korts ([9]), and what is framed are actual stamps. i took a photo of a framed board with framed stamps and this dedication plaque, dedicated to the designer of the figures on the stamps (at her home, with her permission), and than cropped the outer frame...
- if you don't mind, i'll try to get Mr. Korts's permission and figure out the bureaucracy here to upload it. if i won't succeed in two days, please delete the file. עמית אבידן (talk) 19:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- giving it a second thought, since there is no photo in the article about Tuvia Korts, can't we use the photo there as "fair use"? עמית אבידן (talk) 19:16, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- OK, it is a misunderstanding. the photo is of a certificate of appreciation. according to the Israeli copyright low, section 22, it is permitted to take a picture of anything which include something protected "by the way". e.g., it is permitted to take a photo of an envelope with a stamp on it. עמית אבידן (talk) 19:59, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Comment עמית אבידן: the stamps ARE the main elements of the image, so cannot be considered "by the way" or de minimis. The stamps are the only significant elements in the image, other than the plain picture frames and a small amount of text, so Israelis copyright law applies per Paragraph 51 of Israeli Postal Services Statute 1986, in its 2004 revised version even when you are the photographer and release the photo under a free licence. Ww2censor (talk) 21:50, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- OK, I have no objection to deleting the file. עמית אבידן (talk) 07:09, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Previously published work without OTRS permission (and no reply from uploader about this). Innisfree987 (talk) 21:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- File:Jennifer McClellan Gubernatorial Campaign Headshot (cropped).jpg - derivative of the above.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Delete the attributed copyright holder "Digital Image House" needs to provide a verifiable permission release. Ww2censor (talk) 21:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
No proof that logo is licensed as stated, https://creativets.org/ doesnt show any indication either. Zppix (talk) 22:01, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
File:Connecticut -New Haven County - -Windham County- -- Delaware -entire state- -- District of Columbia -- Florida -Alachua County - Gulf County- - NARA - 17470255 (page 38).jpg
[edit].jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Trivial internal governmental communication with no educational or historical value Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:00, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep The argument here appears to be that page 38, specifically, of this 1800-page document, a historical record that has been preserved, cataloged, and digitized by the US National Archives, should be deleted because you do not find it interesting enough. I don't think that is how Commons works. Dominic (talk) 16:02, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- The file description contains no indication that it is part of a larger document, nor that this specific page has any educational or historical value separate from the document as a whole. Commons is not an indiscriminate collection of every government document to ever exist, and a large number of pages of this document are blatantly out of scope. If the whole document is valuable, then it should be uploaded as a single document rather than hundreds of contextless jpgs. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:54, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep per Dominic. Multichill (talk) 09:48, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 23:36, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_logo.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_logo.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Possibly non-free. As far as I can tell, government works in Turkey are not automatically PD. The court was established in 1961, so assuming this work was published anonymously (haven't verified, but copyright protection would last even longer otherwise), it would still be protected for 70 years (i.e soonest it could be free is 1961+70=2031) FASTILY 23:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_logo.svg){kind=link}
Support. Non-free logo. -Geraki TLG 07:04, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
_logo.svg){kind=link}
Support. Per nom as non-free logo. Elshad (talk) 12:19, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
_logo.svg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:36, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
_logo.svg){kind=link}
Any evidence it has been published 1961 (if ever). Anyway 75 years have not passed. Rameshe999 (talk) 23:12, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:36, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Any evidence it has been published 1961 (if ever). Anyway 75 years have not passed. Rameshe999 (talk) 23:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:36, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Potential copyvio. Low image resolution and missing exifdata. COM:OTRS permission is needed. SCP-2000 23:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete plus this would very likely need explicit consent, as it displays an underage girl. --Martin Urbanec (talk) 14:50, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:36, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Any evidence it has been published 1961 (if ever). Anyway 75 years have not passed. Rameshe999 (talk) 23:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:36, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Any evidence it has been published 1955 (if ever). Anyway 75 years have not passed. Rameshe999 (talk) 23:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:37, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Any evidence it has been published 1961 (if ever). Anyway 75 years have not passed. Rameshe999 (talk) 23:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:37, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Howhontanozaz as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Permission from La Liberté (per metadata) needed via OTRS. Seems like Alain Wicht works for La Liberte, so maybe he can send OTRS-permission. Taivo (talk) 19:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 05:57, 6 June 2021 UTC: No permission since 29 May 2021 --Krdbot 13:54, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
No COM:FOP in Iran 4nn1l2 (talk) 14:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:21, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 유자차 as Speedy for violation of FOP South Korea. Converted by me to regular DR to allow for discussion whether the depicted structure is above threshold of originality by Korean copyright-law. -- Túrelio (talk) 08:08, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- Keep대한민국 저작권법에는 이런 조항은 없음.--hyolee2/H.L.LEE (talk) 04:54, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:27, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Repeat the nomination. South Korean copyright law doesn't provide commercial FOP. This is a new station, in contrast to the older station that was completed in 1965 according to korean Wikipedia. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The response of the uploader was "There is no such provision in the Korean copyright law." This is not true: under (2) of Article 35 of the Copyright Act (Act No. 432 of January 28, 1957, as amended up to Act No. 14634 of March 21, 2017): "Works of art, etc. exhibited at all times at an open place...may be reproduced by any means: Provided that in any of the following cases, the same shall not apply: .......4.Where the reproduction is made for the purpose of selling its copies." This prohibition on selling its copies extends to prohibition of usage of such images in postcard, calendar, or collection of photos. Therefore, South Korean FOP, which is noncommercial only, is unacceptable on Wikimedia Commons (which mandates free commercial uses in accordance with CC/PD licensing used). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- For threshold of originality issue, South Korea has a very low standard. A simple UV house was the subject of a 2008 litigation involving Pomato advertising company and the house's architect Min Gyu-am. Ultimately, the Seoul Central District Court handed down the final verdict in which the ad company violated the architect's copyright by including the UV house in their TV ad, and they were to pay economic rights damages to the architect as the penalty. This case strengthens Wikimedia's FOP perspective for SoKor - no acceptable FOP in that country (until the law is amended/reformed). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep사진가 Min Gyu-am이 서울중앙지법(Seoul Central District Court)에 소송을 제기한 사건은 원고 Min Gyu-am의 승소가 아니고 화해이다. 제(hyolee2/H.L.LEE (talk))가 서울중앙지법(Seoul Central District Court)에 어느 언론사가 제가 촬영한 어느 경찰서의 사진을 사용한 건은 원고(hyolee2/H.L.LEE (talk))에 사진의 저작권이 있다고 인정되어 승소했다.--hyolee2/H.L.LEE (talk) 06:32, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Rough machine translation (by Papago): The case in which photographer Min Gyu-am filed a lawsuit with the Seoul Central District Court is not a win for the plaintiff Min Gyu-am, but a reconciliation. H.L.LEE won the Seoul Central District Court, where a media company used a photo of a police station I took because it was recognized that the photo was copyrighted. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Is it reconciliation? Or did architect Min Gyu-am appealed to the highest court of Korea, after the lower court made a different ruling. It's not reconciliation, but an affirmation of what is written in the copyright law of your country which discourages uploads here on Wikimedia Commons (no commercial reuses, in effect no PD or CC licensing allowed). It set the jurisprudence straight after the lower court made a ruling that was totally in conflict with the noncommercial FOP provision of the Korean copyright law. That 2008 case against the user Pomato Company nailed SoKor's no acceptable FOP status, in Wikimedian perspective. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Rough machine translation (by Papago): The case in which photographer Min Gyu-am filed a lawsuit with the Seoul Central District Court is not a win for the plaintiff Min Gyu-am, but a reconciliation. H.L.LEE won the Seoul Central District Court, where a media company used a photo of a police station I took because it was recognized that the photo was copyrighted. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- {{KOGL}}? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 07:46, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: KOGL is irrelevant here. The Korean government cannot overwrite architects' copyrights. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:57, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:33, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
_0167.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_0167.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by AntiCompositeNumber as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Non-free graphics above COM:TOO US.
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as the potentially infringing elements aren't clearly visible in this case. -- Túrelio (talk) 06:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_0167.jpg){kind=link}
- Bild angepasst und neu hochgeladen H.Wolfgang (talk) 10:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The drawing of Niagara Falls, the mountains behind the words New York, and the drawing of the NYC skyline are all individually above the threshold of originality in the US. Works by the New York State government are not automatically public domain, see Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United States § US States and Territories. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 14:36, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Danke habe das falsch verstanden, dachte es geht um den Firmennamen. Dann bitte die Bilder löschen.H.Wolfgang (talk) 13:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:33, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
_0167.jpg){kind=link}
Dubious own work: small size, user upload history
- File:تلیت دوغ با خیار سبز و رطب و پیاز و منگک.jpg
- File:نخلستانها و جوی آب در آبپخش.jpg
- File:آبشار مصنوعی چهاربرج آبپخش.jpg
- File:نخلستانهای آبپخش 8.jpg
- File:نمایش ساواک در آبپخش سال ۱۳۵۹.jpg
- File:تعزیه خوانی در آبپخش.jpg
- File:نخلستان و جویهای آب در آبپخش.jpg
- File:طبیعت زیبای منطقه چیتی در آبپخش.jpg
- File:طبیعت زیبا در کنار جوی های آب آبپخش.jpg
- File:انجیر آبپخش.jpg
- File:یک اقامتگاه بومگردی در آبپخش 1.jpg
- File:یک اقامتگاه بومگردی در آبپخش.jpg
- File:Date palms in Ab-pakhsh 3.jpg
- File:دراج سیاه آبپخش.jpg
- File:ماهی رودخانه آبپخش.jpg
- File:کشت هندوانه در آبپخش.jpg
- File:میوه درخت کنار (سدر) در آبپخش 1.jpg
- File:درمانگاه قدیم آبپخش درگیری های اول انقلاب.jpg
- File:مرحوم آیت الله حاج سید جواد مهدوی مرتضوی.jpg
- File:مشتک کراتی آبپخش.jpg
- File:بسته بندی رطب.jpg
- File:عکس هوایی قدیمی شهر آبپخش.jpg
_%D8%AF%D8%B1_%D8%A2%D8%A8%D9%BE%D8%AE%D8%B4_1.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
4nn1l2 (talk) 14:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- All the images are taken from my friends and there is no problem for publishing. The reason is not acceptable to me. Rohalamin (talk) 14:04, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- The details of copyright for this photo is provided: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%D8%B9%DA%A9%D8%B3_%D9%87%D9%88%D8%A7%DB%8C%DB%8C_%D9%82%D8%AF%DB%8C%D9%85%DB%8C_%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%B1_%D8%A2%D8%A8%D9%BE%D8%AE%D8%B4.jpg Rohalamin (talk) 15:01, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
- @4nn1l2: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohalamin (talk • contribs) 10:23, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: "Taken from my friends" is not an acceptable license here -- each of the friends must gie a free license via OTRS. The last one was kept per the comment above. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:39, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Most probably some scanned material from an external source such as a newspaper or a book (see the "paper effect" on the image). The absence of related metadata also points towards that direction. Possibility of copyrights infringement as a result. Glorious 93 (talk) 17:47, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The author of these photo was Yuri Fokin (see wikipage in Russian), who lived in Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville at that time. The fact that these photos were scanned from paper, and not from negatives, may be explained by the fact that the author did not save the negatives. This information was reported by Deacon Andrei Psarev (see wikipage in Russian), a professor at Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 02:02, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: If the author is Yuri Fokin, then it is not "own work" of the uploader as claimed. We need a license from Yuri Foken's heir. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Most probably some scanned material from an external source such as a newspaper or a book (see the "paper effect" on the image). The absence of related metadata also points towards that direction. Possibility of copyrights infringement as a result. Glorious 93 (talk) 17:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The author of these photo was Yuri Fokin (see wikipage in Russian), who lived in Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville at that time. The fact that these photos were scanned from paper, and not from negatives, may be explained by the fact that the author did not save the negatives. This information was reported by Deacon Andrei Psarev (see wikipage in Russian), a professor at Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 02:02, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Most probably some scanned material from an external source such as a newspaper or a book (see the "paper effect" on the image). The absence of related metadata also points towards that direction. Possibility of copyrights infringement as a result. Glorious 93 (talk) 17:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The author of this photo was Yuri Fokin (see wikipage in Russian), who lived in Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville at that time. The fact that these photos were scanned from paper, and not from negatives, may be explained by the fact that the author did not save the negatives. This information was reported by Deacon Andrei Psarev (see wikipage in Russian), a professor at Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
_in_1988.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_in_1988.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Most probably some scanned material from an external source such as a newspaper or a book (see the "paper effect" on the image). The absence of related metadata also points towards that direction. Possibility of copyrights infringement as a result. Glorious 93 (talk) 17:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
_in_1988.jpg){kind=link}
- That's clear, these are paper scans. But these images have never been published on the Internet before. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 17:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Since all the images are taken from the same source, we should discus it in one place, and not individually. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 18:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The author of these photo was Yuri Fokin (see wikipage in Russian), who lived in Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville at that time. The fact that these photos were scanned from paper, and not from negatives, may be explained by the fact that the author did not save the negatives. This information was reported by Deacon Andrei Psarev (see wikipage in Russian), a professor at Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
_in_1988.jpg){kind=link}
Most probably some scanned material from an external source such as a newspaper or a book (see the "paper effect" on the image). The absence of related metadata also points towards that direction. Possibility of copyrights infringement as a result. Glorious 93 (talk) 17:50, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The author of this photo was Yuri Fokin (see wikipage in Russian), who lived in Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville at that time. The fact that these photos were scanned from paper, and not from negatives, may be explained by the fact that the author did not save the negatives. This information was reported by Deacon Andrei Psarev (see wikipage in Russian), a professor at Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Most probably some scanned material from an external source such as a newspaper or a book (see the "paper effect" on the image). The absence of related metadata also points towards that direction. Possibility of copyrights infringement as a result. Glorious 93 (talk) 17:50, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The author of this photo was Yuri Fokin (see wikipage in Russian), who lived in Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville at that time. The fact that these photos were scanned from paper, and not from negatives, may be explained by the fact that the author did not save the negatives. This information was reported by Deacon Andrei Psarev (see wikipage in Russian), a professor at Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Most probably some scanned material from an external source such as a newspaper or a book (see the "paper effect" on the image). The absence of related metadata also points towards that direction. Possibility of copyrights infringement as a result. Glorious 93 (talk) 17:51, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The author of this photo was Yuri Fokin (see wikipage in Russian), who lived in Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville at that time. The fact that these photos were scanned from paper, and not from negatives, may be explained by the fact that the author did not save the negatives. This information was reported by Deacon Andrei Psarev (see wikipage in Russian), a professor at Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Most probably some scanned material from an external source such as a newspaper or a book (see the "paper effect" on the image). The absence of related metadata also points towards that direction. Possibility of copyrights infringement as a result. Glorious 93 (talk) 17:51, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The author of this photo was Yuri Fokin (see wikipage in Russian), who lived in Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville at that time. The fact that these photos were scanned from paper, and not from negatives, may be explained by the fact that the author did not save the negatives. This information was reported by Deacon Andrei Psarev (see wikipage in Russian), a professor at Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Most probably some scanned material from an external source such as a newspaper or a book (see the "paper effect" on the image). The absence of related metadata also points towards that direction. Possibility of copyrights infringement as a result. Glorious 93 (talk) 17:51, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The author of this photo was Yuri Fokin (see wikipage in Russian), who lived in Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville at that time. The fact that these photos were scanned from paper, and not from negatives, may be explained by the fact that the author did not save the negatives. This information was reported by Deacon Andrei Psarev (see wikipage in Russian), a professor at Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Most probably some scanned material from an external source such as a newspaper or a book (see the "paper effect" on the image). The absence of related metadata also points towards that direction. Possibility of copyrights infringement as a result. Glorious 93 (talk) 17:51, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The author of this photo was Yuri Fokin (see wikipage in Russian), who lived in Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville at that time. This information was reported by Deacon Andrei Psarev (see wikipage in Russian), a professor at Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville. The fact that these photos were scanned from paper, and not from negatives, may be explained by the fact that the author did not save the negatives. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 02:06, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Most probably some scanned material from an external source such as a newspaper or a book (see the "paper effect" on the image). The absence of related metadata also points towards that direction. Possibility of copyrights infringement as a result. Glorious 93 (talk) 17:52, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The author of this photo was Yuri Fokin (see wikipage in Russian), who lived in Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville at that time. This information was reported by Deacon Andrei Psarev (see wikipage in Russian), a professor at Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville. The fact that these photos were scanned from paper, and not from negatives, may be explained by the fact that the author did not save the negatives. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 02:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:45, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Most probably some scanned material from an external source such as a newspaper or a book (see the "paper effect" on the image). The absence of related metadata also points towards that direction. Possibility of copyrights infringement as a result. Glorious 93 (talk) 17:52, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- The author of this photo was Yuri Fokin (see wikipage in Russian), who lived in Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville at that time. This information was reported by Deacon Andrei Psarev (see wikipage in Russian), a professor at Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville. The fact that these photos were scanned from paper, and not from negatives, may be explained by the fact that the author did not save the negatives. ~ Чръный человек (talk) 02:07, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:48, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpeg){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The print is obviously modern so copyrighted. The book page is the main subject of the image so the image is copyvio. 維基小霸王 (talk) 01:36, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpeg){kind=link}
- The page have a quite simple design, not copyright material, moreover, the details of the page are not totally visible, even if the image was under copyright, the presence of it os quite minimum. Furthermore, seems to a representative of old Chinese calendar, another reason for not being a copyvio.
- -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 02:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: per user:Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton: image in book is warped, out of focus, DM. rest of photo has no copyright issues. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:16, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpeg){kind=link}
Decisión propia del usuario Villalaso (talk) 13:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: doesn't qualify for courtesy deletion, in use. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:19, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Decisión propia del usuario Villalaso (talk) 13:11, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: doesn't qualify for courtesy deletion, in use. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:19, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Any evidence it has been published 1955 (if ever). Anyway 75 years have not passed. Rameshe999 (talk) 23:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
- Wrong licensces , Rangoon of course is in Burma, thus corrected to {{PD-Myanmar}} which settles the deletion request (“According to the Copyright Act 1914 of Burma: For photographs, copyright expires 50 years after the date that the original negative from which the photograph was directly or indirectly derived was made.”). --Zenwort (talk) 10:57, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: per Zenwort. --Sanandros (talk) 20:37, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
converted by me to DR from a copyvio-speedy by IP 150.203.124.40 for "http://urbatorium.blogspot.com/2009/09/breve-estudio-sobre-la-historia-y-el.html" in order to check whether photo in this case is still covered by PD-art/old. Túrelio (talk) 15:46, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- For the IP's comments, see edit-summaries in the file-history. --Túrelio (talk) 15:47, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
.jpg&action=history){kind=link}
- Keep. The IP's argument that it is not a picture of a two-dimensional work is not convincing. -- Asclepias (talk) 23:58, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- Respuesta. No se trata de un argumento, sino que de un hecho: la imagen es una fotografía reciente tomada por el autor del blog «Urbatorium» y él es el dueño de los derechos sobre esa imagen. No se trata de una imagen en dos dimensiones, puesto que se puede apreciar claramente el doblez de las hojas y la sombra que se proyecta en él.
- Remove. La observación anterior especifica el origen de la imagen publicada aquí. Dado que se trata de una fotografía reciente con un autor fácilmente individualizable, debiese ser removida. -- Herufuin (talk) 10.04, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- Keep per {{PD-Art}}. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:56, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
- Remove. La fotografía fue tomada personalmente por el autor del blog y la integró en un informe que remitió al Senado de la República de Chile el 26 de agosto del 2009. Contiene una clara perspectiva tridimensional, puesto que es visible el doblez de las hojas que separan la imagen integral del escudo. En otros términos, el autor del blog tomó directamente la foto desde el libro donde aparece la imagen del escudo y los derechos sobre esa foto le pertenencen a él y no pueden ser ocupados por Wikipedia. En consecuencia, la imagen debe ser removida. -- Herufuin (talk) 10.57, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
- Comment. I have just realized that neither Asclepias nor Pieter Kuiper are able to understand Spanish. As an obvious consequence, you have not understood the reasons given before to remove the file. Let me explain you—the file is a photo taken personally by the author of the blog and he is the owner of its copyrights. The photo is not a two-dimensional image, for it shows clearly the ply of the sheets in the middle of the photographed book. The author included this photo in a report for the Senate of the Republic of Chile, sent the 26th of August 2009. This was the original place of his photo. After that, he published the same image in his blog "Vrbatorium", the 12th of September 2009. Therefore, the file has to be removed. -- Herufuin (talk) 06.07, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Kept. - la sombra no tiene suficiente originalidad para causar copyright - Jcb (talk) 17:03, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Comment. Jcb, no has tenido en consideración que la fotografía fue tomada personalmente por el autor del blog y que alguien la copió vulgarmente desde ahí sin siquiera mencionar la fuente de la imagen. Porque la imagen, como ya he dicho previamente, es una fotografía y no una mera copia de lo que aparece en el libro desde donde fue captada. ¿Acaso tú crees que fue muy fácil acceder al documento y conseguir una fotografía desde él? Llevar a cabo el esfuerzo de conseguir acceso y las autorizaciones pertinentes debiese ser retribuido, al menos, citando la verdadera fuente de la imagen y no pasando por alto que ella es propiedad de alguien en particular. Si la imagen no es removida, debiese al menos ser reconocida como tomada desde el blog «Vrbatoirum», puesto que el autor de este blog fue quien consiguió la fotografía y porque no hay ningún otro sitio web desde donde haya podido ser tomada (sin permiso por cierto). El mismo autor del blog interpone esta condición en su blog: puedes leerla en la barra lateral izquierda de él. -- Herufuin (talk) 02.55, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
The image is under copyright and its author did not authorize the use of this photograph here--the original source is even quoted in the file's page (!). There are relevant precedents set up by Graves Case, 1869, L.R. 4 Q.B. 715; Jeweler's Circular Pub Co. v. Keystone Pub Co. 274 F 932, 934 (S.D. N.Y., 1921); 2008 WL 557412, p.16 (S.D. Cal. 2008), and Salvator Mundi LLC v. Laura Sotka and Sean Brothers, Action 7:2011 CVO 05404. 2800:300:62C1:B770:0:0:0:1 21:01, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - Too old and too dark to claim anything. --E4024 (talk) 23:03, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Remove. Being "old" or "dark" are not valid criteria for transgressing copyrights. This is simply illegal and punishable by law. As stated in the cited case of Jeweler's Circular Pub Co. v. Keystone Pub Co. 274 F 932, 934 (S.D. N.Y., 1921), "no photograph, however simple, can be unaffected by the personal influence of the author." No matter how "old" looks to you, this is still the work of the person who actually took the photo. Besides, as stated in the Graves Case, 1869, L.R. 4 Q.B. 715, "a photograph taken from a picture is an original photograph, in so far that to copy it [the picture] is an infringement of the Copyright Act." So there is no way that anyone claims a photo has no copyright. The rights of the author must be observed and, therefore, this photo file must be erased.2800:300:62C1:7FF0:0:0:0:1 19:45, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
- BTW, this photo is not actually "old", for it was taken within the last twenty years by the author of the blog "Vrbatorium" (credited as the source of this file), who is still alive, indeed. All the content within that blog, placed in <http://urbatorium.blogspot.com/>, is under copyright of his author. All of it. And this photo, in particular, was taken personally by him after struggling to get access to the book it depicts. But it doesn't really matter how much effort he spent in doing this, as this photo is his personal property and should not be publicly displayed without his permission.2800:300:62C1:7FF0:0:0:0:1 23:06, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
- But that is not a photo it is a 2d reproduction. So the photo case doesen't apply here.--Sanandros (talk) 20:41, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Too old to be copyrighted. All of the previous reasons provided are groundless. Photographs of public domain works do not generate new copyrights. --Kuatrero (talk) 01:56, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
Kept. (non-admin closure) - No valid reason to remove. Work is obviously in the public domain. --Kuatrero (talk) 21:18, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
There is no FOP in SoKor. Same rationale as that of previous nomination. The subject - the statue - is the integral part of the image and cropping it out wil leave the image useless. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:16, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 14:35, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Masur as no permission (No permission since). Permission is not needed, as a file consists only of simple shape and short phrase and is clear {{PD-textlogo}}. ~Cybularny Speak? 11:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Czekamy na meila z dowodem zrobieni alogo na zamówienie dla nas i rpzekazaniu nam praw autorskich :) lewandowskamaja97
Deleted: per Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Poland#Threshold_of_originality the threshold of originality in Poland is low. No permission received as far as I can see. --Ellywa (talk) 19:07, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
The focus here is clearly the team logo. Not sure how things stand in terms of copyrights for this one. Especially with the current legislation in Greece. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:00, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: according to COM:TOO Greece "Originality is understood by Greek jurisprudence as a notion of “statistical uniqueness”, which means that the work involves skill, labor and judgment emanating from the author and that no other person, acting under the same circumstances, could produce the exact same work". Imho this design is not unique. The clover is present on the clothing.uniform since 1919 at least and the other elements are regular shapes and text. --Ellywa (talk) 19:10, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
