Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2021/05/10
 |
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}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
..jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![97 File:Орден "Золотой Мангуст".jpg](#File:Орден_"Золотой_Мангуст".jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![151 File:Susanne "Sanne" Ledermann (October 7, 1928 – November 19, 1943) .jpg](#File:Susanne_"Sanne"_Ledermann_(October_7,_1928_–_November_19,_1943)_.jpg){kind=link}
![152 File:Susanne "Sanne" Ledermann (October 7, 1928 – November 19, 1943).jpg](#File:Susanne_"Sanne"_Ledermann_(October_7,_1928_–_November_19,_1943).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
![196 File:"Золотой Мангуст" 2018 года.jpg](#File:"Золотой_Мангуст"_2018_года.jpg){kind=link}
![197 File:Юрий Годо на "Золотом Мангусте".jpg](#File:Юрий_Годо_на_"Золотом_Мангусте".jpg){kind=link}
![199 File:"Золотой Мангуст" 2011 года.jpg](#File:"Золотой_Мангуст"_2011_года.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
COM:FLICKRWASH Ytoyoda (talk) 02:19, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deleted per COM:CSD#G3. -- CptViraj (talk) 04:08, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
COM:DW. A photograph within a photograph, the Flickr user does not own the rights to this image. Ytoyoda (talk) 03:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Speedy deleted per COM:CSD#G3. -- CptViraj (talk) 04:09, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
I originally tagged this as {{Speedy}} as this was an unused personal photo with little encyclopedic value, but BalloonAlien2021 removed the tag. The user is welcome to present the rationale for keeping this image on Commons. Ytoyoda (talk) 03:44, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
F*ck this s*it! I'm leaving forever and ever and ever! — Preceding unsigned comment added by BalloonAlien2021 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Speedy deleted per COM:CSD#G3. -- CptViraj (talk) 04:10, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
自分のプライバシーを傷つけると気がつきました 由紀奈 (talk) 06:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 10:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
アップロードは間違いです 由紀奈 (talk) 06:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, courtesy. --Podzemnik (talk) 10:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused logo, no educational value, out of scope. Sakhalinio (talk) 14:41, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of project Sakhalinio (talk) 14:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of project Sakhalinio (talk) 14:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
It is an invasion of Privacy I did not upload this file on my own and someone else uploaded it Now whenever I search my name I see this and it makes me uncomfortable DiamondWiner (talk) 17:14, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- It was your own upload, DiamondWiner, not of somebody else. --Túrelio (talk) 19:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 19:27, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Marked for speedy deletion, notification removed by uploader. Problem still remains. Taken from: https://www.filmstarts.de/personen/126410/bilder/detail/?cmediafile=21662472 Hiro (talk) 18:54, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I see that you have replaced the tag. So? --E4024 (talk) 18:59, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- What do you mean, "so"? Hiro (talk) 19:09, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, blatant copyvio "Copyright Roberto Ricciuti/Getty Images". --Túrelio (talk) 19:16, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
I don't need it on here anymore CamdenCountyWX0216 (talk) 18:59, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 19:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
No image at all. Contains promotional content. Satdeep Gill (talk) 14:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 20:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
I recreated same files as .jpg and would like the .png versions deleted because they're huge. The jpg quality is fine for these.
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 017.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 018.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 040.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 042.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 055.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 058.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 072.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 074.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 077.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 086.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 094.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 097.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 100.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 102.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 106.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 126.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 129.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 141.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 143.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 152.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 155.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 158.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 161.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 172.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 174.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 177.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 188.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 199.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 215.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 219.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 227.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 244.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 247.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 254.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 268.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 274.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 276.png
- File:Somefeudalcoatso00fostrich Page 278.png
The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 18:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Keep The files are only about 5mb each, which is relatively small. Many modern cameras will often create far larger files. PNG is also preferred over JPG, where available, as PNG doesn't reduce image quality through compression. If you are talking about the size of the images in terms of number of pixels, the media wiki software is usually good at auto-scaling the images, so that isn't an issue. From Hill To Shore (talk) 00:53, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- Hi @From Hill To Shore: . I just didn't know. Thanks for the info. :) --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 02:16, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- @The Eloquent Peasant: Com:Thumbnail image is the guidance, and what will happen for the reproduction at enWS, as they will be set somewhat within the work, they will be cached at that level which means readily available rather than regenerated on every occasion. [Don't ask me about the black magic aspect!] — billinghurst sDrewth 02:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- Hi @From Hill To Shore: . I just didn't know. Thanks for the info. :) --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 02:16, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: jpg and png are both acceptable, even duplicates. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:38, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Marked for speedy deletion, notification removed by uploader. Problem still remains. Taken from KLM flight magazine: https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/631038-klm-final-flight-b747-3.html#post10750917. Hiro (talk) 18:51, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio at 19:15, 10 Mai 2021 UTC: Copyright violation: from KLM flight magazine https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/631038-klm-final-flight-b747-3.html#post10750917 --Krdbot 02:57, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Gemmylogo.jpg 2001:12B4:2DB:E701:81BC:A9B5:D562:53CD 23:06, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
UglyDolls (2019) theatrical poster.png Homesand (talk) 14:14, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Coconut Fred's Fruit Salad Island.png Homesand (talk) 23:52, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, https://forum.munkonggadget.com/setting/profile/9591/ 2011. --Túrelio (talk) 08:16, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Same file re-uploaded by sock.
Mock logotype of Gemmy Industries by a sock of its uploader. Useless media file - Commons is not a free webhost. — kashmīrī 00:24, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete per nom and above section, and as copyvio of https://forum.munkonggadget.com/setting/profile/9591/ . — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:38, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 12:33, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
COM:SPAM. Used in userpage as spam.
SCP-2000 17:27, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and likely copyvios. --Gbawden (talk) 06:43, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Was uploaded wrongly under Creative Commons License Krillesten (talk) 15:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, per G7. --Túrelio (talk) 12:27, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Flickr page says is copyrighted, no CC license https://www.flickr.com/photos/rarvesen/49254686072/in/album-72157712306740183/ Umimmak (talk) 00:37, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio at 14:22, 11 Mai 2021 UTC: Copyright violation: "All rights reserved" [1]. ADDENDUM: Confusingly seems to have appropriate license here [2], which is not the photographer's page. --Krdbot 02:52, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
I shared/uploaded this photo without no idea (didn’t know it’s forbidden to share) if it’s okay to share it anywhere but then as I see, the owner of the photo doesn’t give permissions to share the photos in the web. So I’ve just read their policy and this photo breaks the site’s rules. Thanks. Jackthespell (talk) 05:46, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: speedy delete as copyvio. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:02, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
I will re-upload this file properly Gowtham Sampath (talk) 09:29, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by EugeneZelenko at 15:45, 12 Mai 2021 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing (F1): Non-trivial political party logo --Krdbot 02:52, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Co9man, who uploaded this image, was blocked long back due to sockpuppetry. Moreover, the image is a violation of copyright rules as it doesn't feature in the said source (link: https://www.oldindianphotos.in/2011_04_25_archive.html?m=1). Shinjoya (talk) 15:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted by Billinghurst at 14:08, 12 Mai 2021 UTC: Co9man, who uploaded this image, was blocked long back due to sockpuppetry. Moreover, the image is a violation of copyright rules as it doesn't feature in the said source. --Krdbot 02:53, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Duplicate Nimatam (talk) 12:31, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination & source not indicating free license. --Lymantria (talk) 06:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Used on a declined draft. E4024 (talk) 02:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: Puppet account upload - gone. --Herby talk thyme 12:55, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused image of an OoS person. (There is a draft article about this person, but, judging by its sources, it has no chances of being accepted.) E4024 (talk) 15:38, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Herbythyme at 12:54, 13 Mai 2021 UTC: puppet account uploads --Krdbot 20:56, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Marked for speedy deletion, notification removed by uploader. Problem still remains. Taken from: https://www.gdaspeakers.com/speaker/john-nance/. Hiro (talk) 18:52, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 02:01, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Copyright infringement – screenshot of game -Zai- (talk) 17:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Delete copyvio @-Zai-: for copyright violation tag the page with {{Copyvio}} as deletion requests is quite backlogged at the moment and Category:Copyright violations is checked more often --Nintendofan885T&Cs apply 20:57, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. closing early as an obvious copyright violation. --Royalbroil 00:45, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
アップロードは間違いです 由紀奈 (talk) 12:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: courtesy deletion: uploader requested deletion on the day of upload. --Yasu (talk) 15:26, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
The source website holds no information on the image license. CC can therefor not be claimed to be the correct license. Hiro (talk) 18:44, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ciell (talk) 21:00, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Şair Ümit Arasan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Self-promotion. Commons is not your personal free web host.
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 49.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 48.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 47.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 46.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 42.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 41.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 40.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 36.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 35.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 33.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 31.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 29.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 26.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 22.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 18.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 14.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 13.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 12.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 11.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 10.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 08.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 07.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 06.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 04.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 01.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Şair Sanatcı 02.jpg
- File:Ümit Arasan Müzik Prodüksiyon Film Yapım Org Ajans Melis Fm.jpg
Achim (talk) 19:26, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:18, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 03:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Şair Ümit Arasan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:41, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 12:51, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:مسجد لعقيبة.jpg
- File:مسجد الشيخ لكحل.jpg
- File:لعقيبة 1.jpg
- File:Laakiba 6.jpg
- File:Sidi mhamed62.jpg
- File:Salembier city.jpg
- File:La placett el mouradia.jpg
- File:Port chiffalo 2.png
- File:Vue khemisti.jpg
- File:Khemisti ville.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:57, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 12:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work. Small size, no metadata. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 08:29, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Elcobbola at 15:49, 17 Mai 2021 UTC: Recreation of content deleted per community consensus (G4) --Krdbot 02:45, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Copyright infringement, source of photograph says that the file is attributed to Ilia Yefimovich/Picture Alliance via Getty Images, no mention of CC license as claimed RoanokeVirginia (talk) 13:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 11:45, 18 Mai 2021 UTC: No permission since 10 May 2021 --Krdbot 20:50, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
I don’t need this file on here anymore CamdenCountyWX0216 (talk) 22:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 13:09, 18 Mai 2021 UTC: No permission since 10 May 2021 --Krdbot 20:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Is she someone in scope? E4024 (talk) 19:48, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- It has got only historical value, but not educational, so it is not useful in Commons. Matlin (talk) 13:56, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - not in scope. — Racconish 💬 06:39, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files in Category:WarnerMedia logos
[edit]Possibly above TOO. Pinging @Tomer T: as they filed Commons:Deletion requests/File:WaterTower Music 2020 logo.svg.
Minoraxtalk 23:59, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 10:06, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
16 KB "own work" by a newcomer; I suspect it was swiped from the net. E4024 (talk) 01:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete used in a FaceBook post that is dated before the file was uploaded to Commons.[3] Verbcatcher (talk) 13:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Gestumblindi (talk) 13:33, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Ashealeslii (talk) 05:15, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Ashealeslii: Is the file really supposed to be named File:Martha Wayles.png, as you attempted to indicate in this edit? How do you know? Where did you get it? — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 18:21, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
The website does not mention anything about this being licensed as CC-BY-SA 4.0. If this file does not meet COM:TOO, then the license must be changed to {{PD-logo}} with {{Trademarked}}; otherwise, it should be deleted from Commons. Ntx61 (talk) 09:54, 10 May 2021 (UTC) (updated Ntx61 (talk) 10:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC))
Update: This file has also been tagged with {{No permission since}}. Ntx61 (talk) 10:00, 10 May 2021 (UTC) (updated Ntx61 (talk) 10:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC))
Deleted: procedural close: already deleted. --Gestumblindi (talk) 13:33, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Titel wurde falsch geschrieben. YaAcar (talk) 12:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: already corrected. --Gestumblindi (talk) 13:34, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Titel wurde falsch geschrieben und kann nicht verbessert werden? YaAcar (talk) 12:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: already corrected. --Gestumblindi (talk) 13:34, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Personal photo for non-Wikipedian- Out of Scope --Alaa :)..! 14:27, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete also File:يوسف القط 0000.jpg: out of project scope. Personal files. --— D Y O L F 77[Talk] 19:15, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 13:35, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Speedy delete I misunderstood the license and this should not have been uploaded. It is not free from copyright. The source page says (in Norwegian) that "portraits can be downloaded and used freely, but not for commercial use." Cashewnøtt (talk) 14:56, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 13:35, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Schmetterlinge sind nicht Gegenstand des Wettbewerbes. Butterflies are not part of the competition. DEspel (talk) 15:15, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
The theme of May is arthropods. Arthropod butterflies (см. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Членистоногие) Tiraspolsky 14:00, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: Whether butterflies are part of a competition isn't relevant to the question whether we can keep this image anyway; if they aren't, just remove it from the competition. --Gestumblindi (talk) 13:36, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
Schmetterlinge sind nicht Gegenstand des Wettbewerbes. Butterflies are not part of the challange. DEspel (talk) 15:16, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Why file a deletion request though? I really don't see any reason for that. --DavidJRasp (talk) 19:49, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello. From the title of this Photo Challenge: "The new challenge features Arthropods other than insects: spiders, crabs, scorpions, millipedes, etc. " I deduced that insects are all included. And, butterflies are part of the family of insects, and artropoda (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lepidoptera).
However, what is really intriguing me is that there are many more pictures of insects (ants, beetles, other butterflies, etc) in the photo challenge and the only one marked to be removed is this one. I can not understand why. If butterflies are not part of the photo challenge I will accept it, but with a reasoned explanation please. HDaneelOlivaw (talk) 00:21, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello; I think, the rules of this challenge are unclearly in a way that could be misunderstood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadarama (talk • contribs) 07:53, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: Whether butterflies are part of a competition isn't relevant to the question whether we can keep this image anyway; if they aren't, just remove it from the competition. --Gestumblindi (talk) 13:38, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
A user adds a copvio tag to this file, which is from a source where there is no copyright note. I revert them with an edit summary to open a DR, they do not. Instead they go and complain about me on the userpage of a user who has complained about me several times. Interesting... E4024 (talk) 20:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- @E4024: Where is the CC0 license on http://tf-eem.gazi.edu.tr/posts/view/title/elektronik-laboratuvari-129319?siteUri=tf-eem ? — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 21:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy delete as a copyvio of http://tf-eem.gazi.edu.tr/posts/view/title/elektronik-laboratuvari-129319?siteUri=tf-eem . — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 22:08, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per above, unless someone finds a section stating photographs on the university's website is CC-0. Bidgee (talk) 01:56, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Gestumblindi (talk) 13:40, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
The image was taken without the person's permission — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 5.106.148.127 (talk) 19:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Small. No metadata. Instagram sized. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 23:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Commons is no social media site. --Mosbatho (talk) 21:48, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: looks like a selfie of a non-notable person. --Gestumblindi (talk) 13:41, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
FBMD in EXIF data and typical for Facebook 2048px resolution. ~Cybularny Speak? 18:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Masur (talk) 05:34, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused personal game screenshot with no explanation of importance. No educational value. Malcolma (talk) 17:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ezarateesteban 20:18, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Looks like a squished screenshot, no exif, unlikely to be own work Gbawden (talk) 11:30, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. —hueman1 (talk • uploads) 12:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 13:51, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Even the title hints it is taken from somewhere and not an own work. E4024 (talk) 17:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Masur (talk) 18:14, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
Not own work. http://www.senatorlarrypressler.com RandomUserGuy1738 (talk) 12:25, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: no evidence of permission to list under this license. czar 18:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
The source link makes absolutely no mention of the work being creative commons Putitonamap98 (talk) 02:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy delete, no free licence at the declared source. Verbcatcher (talk) 13:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Moreover: Recreation of content previously deleted per community consensus, see COM:SPEEDY#G4. Verbcatcher (talk) 13:57, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete as this is clearly a violation of copyright. Jon698 (talk) 19:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: G4 - speedily deleted. --rubin16 (talk) 19:59, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Any scope? E4024 (talk) 00:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 03:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
In scope? E4024 (talk) 01:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 03:03, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
This picture is a random upload of a person that does not necessitate nor asked for their own Wikipedia page by any means. Polarkold (talk) 09:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 02:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ravikumar302039 (talk · contribs)
[edit]For company advertisement only. All files marked with logo and address/contact intormation. All unused.
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, cargo lift, industrial lift, warehouse lift,Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cargo lift, industrial lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Cage lift, cargo lift, industrial lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, industrial lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, cargo lift, industrial lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, cargo lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift,Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, cargo lift, industrial lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry,.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, cargo lift, warehouse lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Cage lift, cargo lift, industrial lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, cargo lift, industrial warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Cage lift, cargo lift, industrial lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, cargo lift, industrial lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, cargo lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, cargo lift, industrial lift, warehouse lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, cargo lift, industrial lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Cargo lift, industrial lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, cargo lift, industrial lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, cargo lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Structure goods lift, cage lift, cargo lift, industrial lift, warehouse lift, Hydraulic lift, Hoist lift, Dumbwaiter lift, Eot cranes, single girder crane, double girder crane, gantry, WINCH.jpg
- File:Dumbwaiter elevator.jpg
GeorgHH • talk 10:23, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 02:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 10:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 03:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Derivative work of an audiovisual program of GMA-7 broadcast on screen — COM:SCREENSHOT! The reverse logo of GMA-7 is found at top-left. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ✗plicit 02:56, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Nichtgefragt 91.33.165.46 12:10, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, in use. --Achim (talk) 17:57, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Die meisten 2003:C7:F08:ED61:C54A:A9B7:953E:FD3A 13:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --✗plicit 02:47, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unused personal file. E4024 (talk) 15:28, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 02:47, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by Mehulkumarnsui003 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:30, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 02:55, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 02:58, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
"This Is A Picture Of RPX" - Is RPX in scope? E4024 (talk) 17:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 02:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mohammad0070 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused private images. Out of scope.
GeorgHH • talk 19:29, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 02:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused private image, out of scope. GeorgHH • talk 19:39, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 02:56, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused private image, out of scope. GeorgHH • talk 19:41, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 02:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
unlikely to be own work Didym (talk) 21:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 02:58, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
vandalismo Aitorembe (talk) 22:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --✗plicit 03:05, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
..jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
..jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
imagen privada Guigale (talk) 22:19, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
..jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: out of scope. ✗plicit 03:00, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
..jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Esta foto fue subida por mi persona y solicito que se elimine a modo de cortesía, debido a que muestra un retrato íntimo sin carácter enciclopédico alguno. (SVPG) (talk) 01:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
-2021-03-18T01:03:00.000Z-File:Yo_a_los_20_(Autorretrato_desnudo_de_un_joven_peruano_de_20_años).jpg){kind=link}
Kept: seems to be withdrawn. --JuTa 14:33, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
Personal privacy (SVPG) (talk) 22:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ✗plicit 02:50, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Commons:Project scope Isderion (talk) 23:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 02:49, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Is he in scope? Turkish Wikipedians? E4024 (talk) 02:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 03:09, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Does not look like a selfie of the uploader. JuTa 20:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 03:08, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused file with unclear purpose. No educational value. Malcolma (talk) 07:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Very low quality image. A better quality replacement image has been uploaded. SierraTangoCharlie1 (talk) 00:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:36, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
No indigenous languages; does not serve the EDUSE. E4024 (talk) 00:22, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — kashmīrī 10:16, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:36, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in the Philippines, definitely built after 1951 and no evidence of being PD pre-1972. Sennecaster (talk) 00:28, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete as uploader. Chlod (say hi!) 00:28, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:37, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Taken from Facebook. E4024 (talk) 00:30, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:37, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Very OoS. E4024 (talk) 00:48, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:37, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Not a real user. See global conts (5 in 3 years). E4024 (talk) 02:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:37, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Is he in scope? Turkish Wikipedians? E4024 (talk) 02:28, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- This looks like the Furkan Turan who is actor with an IMDb page, which would make this within scope.[4] Verbcatcher (talk) 14:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- If so, keep it then. (Within parentheses: There has been such an expansion or better explosion in the Turkish film industry that everyday I see many names that I had never heard of before...) --E4024 (talk) 14:52, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 21:38, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Facebook file. E4024 (talk) 02:29, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:38, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Is he in scope? Turkish Wikipedians? E4024 (talk) 02:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:38, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Taken from Facebook E4024 (talk) 02:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:39, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
COM:DW of a copyrighted character. Yuraily Lic (talk) 02:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:39, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
This image appears in a 2010 Smithsonian Magazine article regarding Rebecca Skloot's book about Henrietta Lacks. The credit there says courtesy of the Lacks family. There is certainly no known CC-BY-SA licensing of any kind associated with the photo. The rights to this photo belong to Henrietta Lacks' heirs. Whoever took the photo might be unknown but the rights to the photo belong to the heirs of Henrietta and David Lacks. Shearonink (talk) 03:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:Models of Taipei 101
[edit]Per COM:FOP Taiwan: no freedom of panorama for indoor works. The depicted object is a scale model of Taipei 101 situated inside the observatory, and per User:Elcobbola/Models models can have copyrights on their own even if small-scale replicas.
- File:TW 台灣 Taiwan 台北101觀景台 Taipei City 101 Observatory August 2019 SSG 09.jpg
- File:TW 台灣 Taiwan 台北101觀景台 Taipei City 101 Observatory August 2019 SSG 12.jpg
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:14, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:Models of Taipei 101
[edit]These freely-licensed images show a replica of Taipei 101 in Honduras. Replicas are eligible for copyrights as evidenced in Davidson v. United States (in the case of Statue of Liberty - Las Vegas replica). See also User:Elcobbola/Models. Regrettably, Honduran FOP is not OK for Commons as it only allows personal uses of images of public space artistic works. Some of the images could be cropped, however, but if all could be cropped, it might result to near-duplicates as the people attend the very same Honduran-Taiwanese event.
- File:01.09 宏京市中華民國廣場的101大樓模型 (32062589582).jpg
- File:01.09 總統及阿斯夫拉市長偕同與會貴賓於101大樓模型前合影留念 (31835666660).jpg
- File:01.09 總統及阿斯夫拉市長偕同與會貴賓於101大樓模型前合影留念 (32062589962).jpg
- File:01.09 總統於中華民國廣場，接受宏京市長阿斯夫拉(Nasry Juan Asfura Zablah)致贈總統市鑰 (32062592982).jpg
- File:01.09 總統於中華民國廣場，接受宏京市長阿斯夫拉(Nasry Juan Asfura Zablah)致贈總統市鑰，表達對訪團一行的歡迎 (31835667660).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
%E8%87%B4%E8%B4%88%E7%B8%BD%E7%B5%B1%E5%B8%82%E9%91%B0_(32062592982).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
%E8%87%B4%E8%B4%88%E7%B8%BD%E7%B5%B1%E5%B8%82%E9%91%B0%EF%BC%8C%E8%A1%A8%E9%81%94%E5%B0%8D%E8%A8%AA%E5%9C%98%E4%B8%80%E8%A1%8C%E7%9A%84%E6%AD%A1%E8%BF%8E_(31835667660).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:45, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:09, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
Near duplicate of File:HMS Tuscarora FL20328.jpg (I think the only difference is the IWM logo), also incorrectly licensed as CCbySA when it should be expired Crown Copyright Dumelow (talk) 04:48, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete: I wasn't aware of the other version of this when I posted c:COM:VPC#Imperial War Museum photo, but I can't see no real need for two basically identical files from the same source in the same format. I'm assuming that the uploader was either unaware of the other version, but they have a specific reason for uploading this one. Either way the licensing of this file is incorrect and even though that can probably be fixed; once again, I'm not sure why two versions of the same photo are needed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:19, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:41, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
This is just a twitter profile picture see @Dr_SaeMoh Niyumard (talk) 05:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
The same rationale applies to File:سعید محمد اسلامی.jpeg, which is the same picture with added watermarks. It's also claimed as "own work" and has an OTRS ticket from 2010 added by the uploader (who isn't an OTRS volunteer). The Twitter profile picture can be seen at https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1376404486789464065/C5XV5iPS.jpg. --bjh21 (talk) 14:15, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:41, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Invalid info Ashealeslii (talk) 06:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:42, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
불멸의 그대에게 NIKON9018 (talk) 06:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:42, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
A copyrighted non-gernmental award is depited. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 06:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
![06:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/05/10#c-Well-Informed_Optimist-2021-05-10T06:49:00.000Z-File:Орден_"Золотой_Мангуст".jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
![21:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/05/10#c-Missvain-2021-06-01T21:43:00.000Z-File:Орден_"Золотой_Мангуст".jpg){kind=link}
It is 2d-2d duplication Reiro (talk) 06:54, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:44, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
According to https://rkd.nl/nl/explore/artists/116448 Nico Broekman worked until the sixties. Tekstman (talk) 07:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:44, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
According to https://rkd.nl/nl/explore/artists/116448, Nico Broekman worekd until ca. 1960. Tekstman (talk) 07:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:45, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Vandalismo Aitorembe (talk) 07:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:46, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Unused file with unclear purpose. No educational value. Malcolma (talk) 07:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:46, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Badly framed picture. Pictures without camera details tend to be suspect. We require a very much better declaration of source and/or permissions. See COM:OTRS. Potential copyright violation. COM:PCP applies. Timtrent (talk) 08:10, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:47, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
The colours of the coat of arms are all wrong (see discussion and here: http://www.europeanheraldry.org/italy/mirandola/ ) Holapaco77 (talk) 07:49, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
- Keep file is in use. It must be universally replaced by a valid one to be removed. Kathisma (talk) 14:05, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Kept: in use. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 08:10, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
The colours of the coat of arms are all wrong (see: Category:Coats of arms of the House of Pico della Mirandola. It have been universally replaced by a valid one (File:Coat of arms of Duchy of Mirandola.svg). Holapaco77 (talk) 08:16, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per nom : no longer not in use. Kathisma (talk) 17:20, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:47, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Mitte27 as no permission (No permission since). It's a derivative work of the historical photograph that is uploaded as a modern own work by the uploader. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 08:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:48, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
It's a derivative work of the historical photograph that is uploaded as a modern own work by the uploader. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 08:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
It's a derivative work of the historical photograph that is uploaded as a modern own work by the uploader. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 08:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
It's a derivative work of the historical photograph that is uploaded as a modern own work by the uploader. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 08:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Uploaded after his death, no exif, unlikely to be own work Gbawden (talk) 08:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC) I took this photograph in my kitchen during his visit to London whilst he was staying in my flat. I am his literary executor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Handy2021 (talk • contribs) 22:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: I'm going to assume good faith with User:Handy2021's comments. However, we need Commons:OTRS. I have requested OTRS to be sent within a week or the file will be deleted. --Missvain (talk) 21:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
I've uploaded the png-version, but I wanted to upload the svg-version. This png-version have to be deleted. Thank you! Welkend (talk) 09:39, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:55, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Redundant: This is a lower resolution copy of File:Grund-_und_Stadtteilschule_Kirchwerder.jpg Minderbinder (talk) 09:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:55, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
non-free screenshot Khinkali (talk) 09:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: It's not a screenshot. --Missvain (talk) 21:56, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
non-free screenshot Khinkali (talk) 09:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:56, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Nandlal Bose has a death date of 1966. There is no evidence that this is copyright expired or available on a free release.
This nomination by default includes the source image File:Yama_and_Savitri_by_Nandlal_Bose_1913.jpg. Fæ (talk) 10:22, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:56, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
unused personal image Migebert (talk) 10:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Unused signature. Likely from an unnotable person who doesn't have an enwiki article as of today. Fails COM:EDUSE. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:22, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Most likely previously published on Facebook: FBMD code seen at the metadata. Proof of identity verification of the true copyright holder (the photographer) via email correspondence is required so to confirm if the uploader is indeed the photographer (the copyright holder) of this image and that the photographer (the copyright owner) has applied the license as indicated, as there have been numerous cases on Wiki before (and up to now) that the uploaders just grabbed images from Facebook or other social media sites. For email template, see COM:OTRS#Email message template for release of rights to a file. Better still, have the original image overwrite this FB-derived image. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:22, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
COM:TOO IRAN 5.75.34.80 12:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 21:58, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Because it is Blurry IShivkumarverma (talk) 12:23, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose - that's not a valid reason. It's a proposed Wikivoyage banner, and it may look blurry as it's a cropped image. SHB2000 (talk) 08:12, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 22:07, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
- keep
{{PD-textlogo}} added. Conny (talk) 12:27, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 22:07, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Risk of copyright violation, appears to be a still from a TV programme. The description mentions France 24, which is a TV network. Verbcatcher (talk) 12:59, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:07, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Unidentified - out of scope 46.9.174.251 13:19, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:08, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Derivative work of a photo that (I guess) is only there for about one year, so FOP doesn't apply. Discostu (talk) 13:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:08, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jan Izquierdo (talk · contribs)
[edit]Improbable claim "own work". Might be PD due to age, but there isn’t enough information to tell.
Rrburke (talk) 13:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:09, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
SVG exists. Not used. Nordat (talk) 13:48, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:09, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
very bad quality, no identified object Hugo.arg (talk) 13:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:09, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Low resolution of work by unnamed artist - out of scope 46.9.174.251 14:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:09, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:Franjo Beslic
[edit]Artworks of sr:Franjo Bešlić, living artist. No permission.
- File:Atelier franjo.jpg
- File:Gravure sur Zeng -.jpg
- File:Les vaches.jpg
- File:Tropeau.jpg
- File:Vache folle.jpg
Smooth O (talk) 14:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:12, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
duplicate file at File:শকুন্তলা (ঈশ্বরচন্দ্র বিদ্যাসাগর).djvu Bodhisattwa (talk) 14:15, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:13, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Out of scope Lotje (talk) 14:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:13, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
File:Blue Hand Drawn Black History Month Social and Emotional Learning Google Classroom Header.ogv
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private video hosting. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:29, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:13, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Autopromotional. --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 04:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:14, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Small file with transmission code; dubious own work. E4024 (talk) 14:56, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:14, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:57, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:14, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Out of scope Lotje (talk) 15:10, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:14, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
File:Ali Alyas “Baba Sheikh” is the religious leader of the Yazidi community of Iraq and world.jpg
[edit]
Small file w/o camera EXIF and by a one-time-visitor; dubious "own work". E4024 (talk) 15:22, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:15, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Based on the other files of the Flickr account, it seems like they are fond of making COM:DW of copyrighted works. I see enwiki has a similar but not identical file en:File:The Death and Life of Marsha P. Johnson.jpg whose resemblance to this one makes me think the Commons file is a screenshot or DW as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Shreyankrishna (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private drawing album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:27, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:29, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:18, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Adnanqutbi27 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
- File:Haji Mohammad Idris (Qutbi Brothers).jpg
- File:Sufi Qawwali Music (Food for the Soul).jpg
- File:Qawwal (Food for the Soul).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 02:41, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Adnanqutbi27 (talk · contribs)
[edit]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) 15:37, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:18, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Screenshot of recorded presentation, no evidence of permission AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 15:38, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:21, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:41, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:22, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Used in unapproved draft. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:23, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:23, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:23, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:54, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:25, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Colorizing people's b/w photos and tagging them "own work" violates ©. From b/w photo you can't tell what color her eyes, clothes actually are, colors are fiction. Photoshopping genocide victims (underage girls!) to look 'pretty' is distasteful. See File_talk:Susanne_"Sanne"_Ledermann_(October_7,_1928_–_November_19,_1943).jpg. 93.237.8.31 16:01, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:26, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Colorizing people's b/w photos and tagging them "own work" violates ©. From b/w photo you can't tell what color her eyes, clothes actually are, colors are fiction. Photoshopping genocide victims (underage girls!) to look 'pretty' is distasteful. See File_talk:Susanne_"Sanne"_Ledermann_(October_7,_1928_–_November_19,_1943).jpg. 93.237.8.31 16:01, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:26, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
_.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Colorizing people's b/w photos and tagging them "own work" violates ©. From b/w photo you can't tell what color her eyes, clothes actually are, colors are fiction. Photoshopping genocide victims (underage girls!) to look 'pretty' is distasteful. See File_talk:Susanne_"Sanne"_Ledermann_(October_7,_1928_–_November_19,_1943).jpg. 93.237.8.31 16:01, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
![16:01, 10 May 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/05/10#c-93.237.8.31-2021-05-10T16:01:00.000Z-File:Susanne_"Sanne"_Ledermann_(October_7,_1928_–_November_19,_1943)_.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:27, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
![22:27, 1 June 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/05/10#c-Missvain-2021-06-01T22:27:00.000Z-File:Susanne_"Sanne"_Ledermann_(October_7,_1928_–_November_19,_1943)_.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Colorizing people's b/w photos and tagging them "own work" violates ©. From b/w photo you can't tell what color her eyes, clothes actually are, colors are fiction. Photoshopping genocide victims (underage girls!) to look 'pretty' is distasteful. See File_talk:Susanne_"Sanne"_Ledermann_(October_7,_1928_–_November_19,_1943).jpg.
--JR (93.237.8.31 16:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC))
![16:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/05/10#c-93.237.8.31-2021-05-10T16:02:00.000Z-File:Susanne_"Sanne"_Ledermann_(October_7,_1928_–_November_19,_1943).jpg){kind=link}
- I'd like to add that the uploader had inserted this photo into all 7 language pages that exist of "Sanne Ledermann" as well as into the Wikidata entry. The German and Italian Wikis noticed and reverted it only hours later, I have now reverted the rest so this photo is no longer used. --JR (93.237.8.31 16:20, 10 May 2021 (UTC))
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:27, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
![22:27, 1 June 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/05/10#c-Missvain-2021-06-01T22:27:00.000Z-File:Susanne_"Sanne"_Ledermann_(October_7,_1928_–_November_19,_1943).jpg){kind=link}
Unused personal photo, out of project Sakhalinio (talk) 16:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Sevim Alan is not out of scope. Someone to whom journalists extend their microphones, and these journalists representing major newspapers of an 80 million country, not at all! The TR:WP, where they delete articles of notable people (who later find themselves places in other WPs and then at times also accepted to TR:WP, as the necessary sources have been added in other WPs by editors like myself and others) cannot decide the "scope" in Commons. This not WP; and less TR:WP. Keep. --E4024 (talk) 19:27, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: Keeping but we are going ot require permissions in one week via COMMONS:OTRS. --Missvain (talk) 22:28, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Personal promo by an OoS person, IMHO. E4024 (talk) 16:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:28, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
DW - the tourist map (while distorted) is the main focus. And not really purposeful image. P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:08, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:39, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
No encyclopaedic relevance watsoever. just a private photograph of somebody's relative Cosal (talk) 16:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:42, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
File:Pamumela 2013 with husband, Dr. Noel Lawrence Warner Ph.D. Fellow of the American Institution for Medical and Biological Engineering.JPG
[edit]
no encyclopaedic relevance of this private family photograph Cosal (talk) 16:19, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:42, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
zero relevance of this private family photograph Cosal (talk) 16:20, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:42, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Without knowing anything about COM:TOO Germany I would assume this logos is above it. Jonteemil (talk) 16:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I would say, that the "Imperial Eagle" is under public domain. The rest of the Logo isnt above the COM:TOO Germany. And as the Logo was first published in 1906 and the club dissolved in 1949 the copyright term expired anyways. --Nick-4711 (talk) 08:48, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 22:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Sourced to a page on antwiki but the link there comes back to this image. Can't verify license information. Ytoyoda (talk) 16:46, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Looks like this photo was previously published at https://lepetitjournal.com/le-mag/ma-vie-dexpat/les-trophees-des-francais-de-letranger-un-tremplin-218696 Ytoyoda (talk) 16:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:43, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Suspected copyvio. I tagged the image as {{copyvio|1=Individual components are not attributed; and are not included in the creator's own uploads.}}, but the uploader reverted me with no edit summary, and without providing sources. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Uploader has now confirmed that the source images are not their own work, but are unattributed works from elsewhere on Commons. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I'm astounded how you thought it appropriate to nominate a montage used in a high-traffic GA for deletion, when all the images are free-use and available on Commons. I made this montage under the guidance of a couple of users from Portsmouth's GA review, where it was scrutinised and approved. It's been up for almost five years with no one raising a boundless claim of copyvio. The proposer also nominated an image of Piccadilly Circus for no valid reason. When I asked him what his rationale was he ignored me. Jaguar (talk) 20:16, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Unless the orignal images are auditable and traceable from the article page the file will be ultimately need to be deleted, despite what sounds like montage image being licensable. There is an attribution issue if those files were licensed CC-BY-SA and that needs to be repsected. Normally there is no issue if using the crop tool to create a single image at that keeps things in order. I o agree these images would appear to be non-commercial. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:34, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- Row2/Left image is File:Old Portsmouth.jpg. Djm-leighpark (talk) 04:48, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
- Row3/right image is File:Portsmouth 01.jpg, but the other
76 need to be identified to avoid a take down. It's not immediately obvios to be me that the HMS Victory image is on Wikipedia. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 22:53, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- Unless the orignal images are auditable and traceable from the article page the file will be ultimately need to be deleted, despite what sounds like montage image being licensable. There is an attribution issue if those files were licensed CC-BY-SA and that needs to be repsected. Normally there is no issue if using the crop tool to create a single image at that keeps things in order. I o agree these images would appear to be non-commercial. Thankyou.Djm-leighpark (talk) 11:34, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- I'm astounded how you thought it appropriate to nominate a montage used in a high-traffic GA for deletion, when all the images are free-use and available on Commons. I made this montage under the guidance of a couple of users from Portsmouth's GA review, where it was scrutinised and approved. It's been up for almost five years with no one raising a boundless claim of copyvio. The proposer also nominated an image of Piccadilly Circus for no valid reason. When I asked him what his rationale was he ignored me. Jaguar (talk) 20:16, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete: Happy to change my !vote if attributions occurs per for example attributions added to Basingstoke montage.png but I'm not seeing evidence of server of several of the constituent files on commons or even via google image search. The montage creator, or in fact anyone, could use other files, some of which they took themselves, to get a new version of the image. But I find it pragmatically probable a suitable attribution/license provenance trail will no longer be able to be established and the current version of the image will need to be deleted.Djm-leighpark (talk) 19:10, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:44, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
copyright infringement -Zai- (talk) 17:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:46, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Private content, unused, out of scope. GeorgHH • talk 17:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
copyright infringement -Zai- (talk) 17:14, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
copyright infringement -Zai- (talk) 17:14, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
cr infringement -Zai- (talk) 17:15, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unused redundant black-and-white copy of File:Who needs an ipod? (144881873).jpg. P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:19, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: It's black adn white. --Missvain (talk) 22:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by AcostaS3222 (talk · contribs)
[edit]These logos are not own work of the uploader, but these logos are created by Disney. About the licensing, it needs a discussion to know if these logos are above or below the Threshold of originality to be in public domain as {{PD-textlogo}}.
Rodney Araujo (talk) 17:59, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:54, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Might be above COM:TOO Germany.
Jonteemil (talk) 18:00, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:55, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Arthur Gröger died in 1960 (cf. M. Dziedzic, W. Zieliński, Leksykon fotografów ziemi kłodzkiej 1839-1945, Bystrzyca Kłodzka-Wrocław 2018, p. 30), file not in PD. Michał Sobkowski (talk) 18:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:55, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Arthur Gröger died in 1960 (cf. M. Dziedzic, W. Zieliński, Leksykon fotografów ziemi kłodzkiej 1839-1945, Bystrzyca Kłodzka-Wrocław 2018, p. 30), file not in PD. Michał Sobkowski (talk) 18:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
- Unfortunately Delete. By the way: not PD in Poland (70 years post death), but PD in USA (pre 1923 etc.). We must also propably nominee another files of the author. Matlin (talk) 14:03, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:05, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
Copyright violation. João Justiceiro (talk) 18:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:22, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Of low resolution and of no real use or purpose anymore. Has been globally replaced by the vectorized File:Arms of Acton.svg. Glorious 93 (talk) 18:14, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete. Per nom : superseded + not in use. Kathisma (talk) 16:20, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 23:23, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Picture was copy-pasted from http://decerkva.org.ua/vykoty.html Kanzat (talk) 18:15, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:05, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Picture was copy-pasted from http://decerkva.org.ua/vykoty.html Kanzat (talk) 18:16, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:05, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Small size and lacking metadata. Uploader has questionable uploads at English Wikipedia such as File:Monkaerial.png. Green Giant (talk) 18:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Not much to say on this really, agree with Green Giant. --LivelyRatification (talk) 20:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Not uploaders own work. See TinEye GeorgHH • talk 19:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Unused private image, out of scope. GeorgHH • talk 19:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Of low resolution and of no real use or purpose anymore. Has been globally replaced by the vectorized File:Oulu.vaakuna.svg. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:41, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per nom : superseded and not in use. Kathisma (talk) 17:18, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:07, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Low resolution, Facebook EXIF data. Unlikely to be own work. ~Cybularny Speak? 19:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:07, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Of low resolution and of no real use or purpose anymore. Has been globally replaced by the vectorized File:Wappen Gießen.svg. Glorious 93 (talk) 19:56, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete. Per nom : superseded + not in use. Kathisma (talk) 16:18, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Of low resolution and of no real use or purpose anymore. Has been globally replaced by the vectorized File:Flag of Malta.svg. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:00, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Of low resolution and of no real use or purpose anymore. Has been globally replaced by the vectorized File:Flag of Spain 1785.svg. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:09, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Because it is Logo DoggoOfSpeed (talk) 20:10, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- It is a self-made variant of the logo --LukasGen (talk) 20:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Of low resolution and of no real use or purpose anymore. Has been globally replaced by the vectorized File:Flag of Greece (1822-1978).svg. Glorious 93 (talk) 20:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
While this file may not be copyrightable in the United States, the file may be copyrightable in China as they have a higher TOO. Since miHoYo is a Chinese company, it would mean that the logo would not be okay for Commons as files on Commons must be free in both the US and in the country of origin. Aasim 21:10, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Hmmm, perhaps, but TOO actually links to the image of File:K2 sports logo.png with a note that it is protected in China but not US. So by the virtue of still being on the TOO page (and on Commons), I am not sure if we have to respect TOO for other countries? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 05:32, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Piotrus The country of origin for this logo is more than likely China, as miHoYo is a Chinese company. The K2 logo originates from US. Aasim 06:56, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- Interesting. So it's the 'country of origin' issue? But why is K2 mentioned in the Chinese TOO case study then? If it is not important for us, it shouldn't be there. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 08:06, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Piotrus Per Commons policy, images must be free in both the United States and the country of origin (where it was first published). Genshin Impact logo is free in the United States, but unlikely to be free in China since China has a lower threshold of originality than the United States, and even simple designs can be copyrighted in China. And since miHoYo is a Chinese company, the logo was more than likely first published inside China. Aasim 23:16, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- You are right, except the issue is - is the logo really failing Chinese TOO? It is simple, but I agree Chinese TOO threshold is low. Shrug. I'd suggest keeping it, although if someone feels paranoid enough to invoke PP, shrug. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 05:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
- Interesting. So it's the 'country of origin' issue? But why is K2 mentioned in the Chinese TOO case study then? If it is not important for us, it shouldn't be there. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 08:06, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Piotrus The country of origin for this logo is more than likely China, as miHoYo is a Chinese company. The K2 logo originates from US. Aasim 06:56, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:09, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Of low resolution and of no real use or purpose anymore. Has been globally replaced by the vectorized File:PoloshirtDrawing.svg. Glorious 93 (talk) 21:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:09, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mahadihasanbipu (talk · contribs)
[edit]out of project scope
Didym (talk) 21:56, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:09, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Derivative work since the Red Wings team logo is almost certainly still protected by copyright which means this almost certainly cannot be kept as licensed without the permission of the team and possibly the NHL itself. per COM:CB#Sports uniforms/kits The logo is also an essential if not the essential element of the image which means de minimis would be near impossible to argue. Blurring out the logo might be acceptable, but the image would then seem to have very little encyclopedic value and thus perhaps not worth keeping anyway. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:10, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Photo taken in 1970s, from book "Е.Н. Подъяпольская, Памятники архитектуры Московской области, Выпуск 1, Стройиздат, 1999". -- Kaganer (talk) 22:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:10, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Photo taken in 1970s, from book "Е.Н. Подъяпольская, Памятники архитектуры Московской области, Выпуск 1, Стройиздат, 1999". -- Kaganer (talk) 22:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:10, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Facebook file. E4024 (talk) 02:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:01, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
This is an older version of the seal of Buffalo, and I can't find any particular original source that may indicate that it is indeed in the public domain. The original versions on the English Wikipedia were deleted, but based on this conversation in particular, I have my doubts. While I would like to have a seal in the article, if it's not free it can't be used. Buffaboy (talk) 02:57, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
To be fair, on this webpage, the original seal does appear to be old enough to where it may be in the public domain. But there isn't a way to confirm this. Buffaboy (talk) 03:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Update: I have found what appears to be an older copy of the seal from an 1860 book. This would suggest that it is in the public domain. Buffaboy (talk) 20:44, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept per discovery above. Buffaboy (talk) 20:49, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
According to metadata the image is copyrighted by Pavel Prozorov Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 06:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:02, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
According to metadata the image is copyrighted by HELGA PETLYA Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 06:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
![06:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/05/10#c-Well-Informed_Optimist-2021-05-10T06:50:00.000Z-File:"Золотой_Мангуст"_2018_года.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:02, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
![21:02, 8 June 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/05/10#c-Jameslwoodward-2021-06-08T21:02:00.000Z-File:"Золотой_Мангуст"_2018_года.jpg){kind=link}
According to metadata the image is copyrighted by Helen_Samoylova Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 06:54, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
![06:54, 10 May 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/05/10#c-Well-Informed_Optimist-2021-05-10T06:54:00.000Z-File:Юрий_Годо_на_"Золотом_Мангусте".jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:02, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
![21:02, 8 June 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/05/10#c-Jameslwoodward-2021-06-08T21:02:00.000Z-File:Юрий_Годо_на_"Золотом_Мангусте".jpg){kind=link}
Unlikely to be own work. Small size, no metadata. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 06:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:03, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work. Small size, no metadata. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 07:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
![07:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/05/10#c-Well-Informed_Optimist-2021-05-10T07:02:00.000Z-File:"Золотой_Мангуст"_2011_года.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:03, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
![21:03, 8 June 2021 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2021/05/10#c-Jameslwoodward-2021-06-08T21:03:00.000Z-File:"Золотой_Мангуст"_2011_года.jpg){kind=link}
Not an own work. E4024 (talk) 02:39, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 14:29, 9 June 2021 UTC: No permission since 1 June 2021 --Krdbot 19:52, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by 廣九直通車 as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The file's source page stated that "Copyright to this resource is held by the creator or current rights holder... It may not be reproduced or distributed in any format without permission of the copyright owner." Given that Paul Chu only gets involved with the University of Houston after 1979 as a professor (refer to w:Paul Ching Wu Chu also), and I found no relevant registration on the U.S. copyright registration, it is quite likely that the file is still copyrighted and unfree. Changed to regular deletion request to ensure sufficient time for OTRS/permission procedures after uploader said that the file is originally freely licensed. 廣九直通車 (talk) 08:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted by Fitindia at 14:29, 9 June 2021 UTC: No permission since 1 June 2021 --Krdbot 19:52, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Possible copyvio, duplicate of https://www.flickr.com/photos/28798706@N05/9403954633/in/photostream/ — hike395 (talk) 14:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 14:30, 9 June 2021 UTC: No permission since 1 June 2021 --Krdbot 19:52, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:23, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 14:29, 9 June 2021 UTC: No permission since 1 June 2021 --Krdbot 19:52, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 14:29, 9 June 2021 UTC: No permission since 1 June 2021 --Krdbot 19:52, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
Regrettably the source is copyrighted. E4024 (talk) 19:19, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 09:01, 10 June 2021 UTC: No permission since 2 June 2021 --Krdbot 13:49, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
Publicity photo that has no FUR so clearly a copyright violation. Previously published at https://www.thechristianbeat.org/jason-gray-debuts-new-song-i-m-gonna-let-it-go/ and other locations. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 09:00, 10 June 2021 UTC: No permission since 2 June 2021 --Krdbot 13:49, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
残念ですがこの画像は百科事典の目的に合いません 由紀奈 (talk) 12:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yasu (talk) 15:10, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Colorizing people's b/w photos and tagging them "own work" violates ©. From b/w photo you can't tell what color her eyes, clothes actually are, colors are fiction. Photoshopping genocide victims (underage girls!) to look 'pretty' is distasteful. See File_talk:Susanne_"Sanne"_Ledermann_(October_7,_1928_–_November_19,_1943).jpg. 93.237.8.31 16:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- As the talk page referenced above has now been deleted, I'd like to summarize: Sanne Ledermann was a jewish girl, murdered in Auschwitz 1943, aged 15. This photo is from 1942, so she was 13-14 here. The uploader downloaded this photo e.g. from https://www.joodsmonument.nl/en/page/183776/susanna-ledermann, colorized it with Photoshop, declared the result "own work" and released it under a CC license. I have no reason to assume the uploader got permission for this from the surviving family of this murder victim! Beside colorization, the uploader also tried to make the photo prettier by cleaning up her eyebrows, giving her denser eyelashes, removing skin imperfections, applying a bit of (Photoshop) lipstick, adding a fancy sparkly background etc. All that to an underage girl, who is no longer able to object to this kind of digital abuse. Also, as I said in the original deletion request, the colors are pure fiction, e.g. the uploader gave her green/gray eyes, which, if you dig a little, turns out to be wrong. --JR (OP, now 93.237.12.163 21:56, 7 June 2021 (UTC))
Deleted: it is derivative work, and the copyright status of the original bw photo is unknown. Consequently, it only can be used in local wikis as Fair Use. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 21:19, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Dubious o/w by a newcomer. E4024 (talk) 00:23, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Weak delete. The uploader lives in Kashmir whereas the subject is Turkish and the image certainly doesn't show Kashmir scenery, so it's certainly no "own work". However, I have been unable to find an exact duplicate online, so no hard proof of copyvio. — kashmīrī 09:46, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: already deleted. --Gestumblindi (talk) 20:20, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
EXIF - LIFANOV DMITRIY, other upload file - anather exif - File:Селиверстов Николай Сергеевич.jpg --NoFrost (talk) 08:08, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: already deleted. --Gestumblindi (talk) 20:20, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Unclear how this is 'own work'. No evidence that the image has been licenced under creative commons. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 08:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete this has the appearance of a manufacturer's product image. It is used in a manufacturer's publication.[5] TinEye indicates that this was on the web before upload here. Verbcatcher (talk) 14:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Duplicate of File:TJ40-G2.jpg, albeit this version has a transparent background. The uploader of the other file appears to be the manufacturer. Verbcatcher (talk) 14:23, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: already deleted. --Gestumblindi (talk) 20:20, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Not uploader's own work but property of "Françoise" according to the watermarking. Le Petit Chat (talk) 09:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- François est l'expéditrice de la lettre qui est adressée, à qui ? Celà n'est pas précisé sur le cartel du musée municipal de Toul. Merci de vottre attention.
Deleted: procedural close: already deleted. --Gestumblindi (talk) 20:20, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
Most likely previously published on Facebook: FBMD code seen at the metadata. Proof of identity verification of the true copyright holder (the photographer) via email correspondence is required so to confirm if the uploader is indeed the photographer (the copyright holder) of this image and that the photographer (the copyright owner) has applied the license as indicated, as there have been numerous cases on Wiki before (and up to now) that the uploaders just grabbed images from Facebook or other social media sites. For email template, see COM:OTRS#Email message template for release of rights to a file. Better still, have the original image overwrite this FB-derived image. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:44, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
This DR also collaterally includes a cropped derivative: File:SpongeColaDangwa (cropped).jpg (derivative uploader @PureTrade: ). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Deleted: procedural close: already deleted. --Gestumblindi (talk) 20:20, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
HRW uses a CC license that is not compatible with WM/WP Hiro (talk) 18:48, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I see "© 2021 Human Rights Watch" at the source... --E4024 (talk) 02:42, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination No permission. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:56, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
Its has mistake Ajaska7 (talk) 17:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Its edited versio not real — Preceding unsigned comment added by GamphState (talk • contribs) 18:02, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:53, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
It has mistake Ajaska7 (talk) 05:08, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 19:49, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Images of the Equestrian statue of Marshal Mannerheim in Helsinki
[edit]The following files are derivative works of Equestrian statue of Marshal Mannerheim (Q2511913), a 1960-statue by Aimo Tukiainen (1917–1996; Q2076471), located in Helsinki, Finland:
- File:2018 IMG 1056-1- (3658241122).jpg – in addition, another (unidentified) contemporary work of art is included
- File:Kiasma ad Helsinki.jpg
- File:Mannerheim - panoramio.jpg – also poor quality
- File:Mannerheim monument.jpg
- File:Mannerheiminaukio - panoramio.jpg
- File:Marskalk Mannerheims ryttarstaty 01.png
- File:Marskalk Mannerheims ryttarstaty 02.png
- File:Marskalk Mannerheims ryttarstaty 03.png
- File:Mr. Gay Finland in his car.jpg
- File:Mannerheim-Statue-1967.jpg – The stamp itself is PD, but it still is a derivative work.
- File:Stamp of Finland - 1967 - Colnect 46499 - Statue of Mannerheim.jpeg – The stamp itself is PD, but it still is a derivative work.
- File:Finland 2010-01-09 (4494649174).jpg – De minimis may apply.
- File:Mannerheimin aukio.jpg – De minimis may apply.
- File:Kiasma and the Mannerheim statue, 2007.jpg – De minimis may apply.
- File:Kiasma Helsinki2.jpg – De minimis may apply.
- File:Kiasma Museum and Manneheim nonument.JPG – De minimis may apply.
- File:Kiasma2.jpg – De minimis may apply.
- File:Mannerheimintie2008.jpg – De minimis may apply.
- File:Mannerheimstatue Kiasma.JPG – De minimis may apply.
- File:Ars 06 in Kiasma.jpg – De minimis may apply.
- File:Finland 2010-01-09 (4503508498).jpg – De minimis may apply.
- File:Helsinki scenery infront of the Mannerheim statue (15018193082).jpg – De minimis may apply.
- File:Juhannus-helsinki-2007-032.jpg – De minimis may apply.
- File:Juhannus-helsinki-2007-115.jpg – De minimis may apply.
- File:Le Kiasma (Helsinki) (2767598999).jpg – De minimis may apply.
- File:Mannerheim statue Helsinki Winter War anniversary.jpg – De minimis may apply.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(2767598999).jpg){kind=link}
The original work (the statue) is still under copyright and thus not in public domain until 2067-01-01. Freedom of panorama is for buildings only in Finland.
Previous cases:
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Statue of Mannerheim in Helsingfors 1995.jpg (deleted)
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:The statue of Marshall Mannerheim - panoramio.jpg (deleted)
- Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Mannerheim ratsastajapatsas.jpg (deleted)
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Juhannus-helsinki-2007-029.jpg (kept)
––Apalsola t • c 14:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC) –– (fix heading) Apalsola t • c 15:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose deletion of File:Helsinki scenery infront of the Mannerheim statue (15018193082).jpg for de minimis reasons. For this image, the statue is not the apparent main focus of the composition. Cheers, Mliu92 (talk) 15:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete most of them. I would say that perhaps 5 are de minimis and can be Keep. And File:Mr. Gay Finland in his car.jpg could be cropped to solve the problem. --MGA73 (talk) 15:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose deletion of of those 15 pictures where de minimis is mentioned by the nominator. The statue is permanently located in a public space and is not is the central element of the pictures. See [6]--Jisis (talk) 15:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose all but the three pictures named "Marskalk Mannerheims ryttarstaty". The relevant clause in the Finnish Copyright Act says: If the work of art is the leading motive of the picture, the picture may not be used for the purpose of gain. The statue is "the leading motive" in the three pictures only. --Surfo (talk) 19:40, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Comment Regarding File:Stamp of Finland - 1967 - Colnect 46499 - Statue of Mannerheim.jpeg I am unsure as to the exact situation with Finland, but from what I see in regards to stamps of most other countries that are PD, we say that they are PD as the whole. The argument is the same as with De Minimis, if somebody were to take a DM work from commons and crop out everything, but that DM element, that would be a copyright violation, but that does not make the original uncropped file a copyvio. However, perhaps in other countries the issue is seen differently. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 11:24, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
Kept: MOst. deleted some, including several for poor quality. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:54, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
Coyvio. I tagged this {{copyvio|1=On-screen images are copyright}}, but the uploader reverted me with an edit summary of "absurd". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:46, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- The proposer has not explained why this has been nominated, while there exists an abundance of identical images like this, this, this, this, or this, and many others at Category:Piccadilly Circus and on its Wikipedia page. Jaguar (talk) 20:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination - There are at least three copyrights here. The fact that there are other images that should be deleted is not a reason to keep this one. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:56, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
Copyrighted artwork by William H. Johnson. Work itself is not PD so Flickr license is irrelevant. Filetime (talk) 19:46, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- AFAIK this was published without a copyright notice circa 1944-1945, therefore it is in the public domain. That's what the Smithsonian American Art Museum says. I suppose they know. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Comment. (e/c) The date of the work is ca 1944. Assume that is true. The basic claim to PD is the work was published before 1978 without a copyright notice. Johnson produced screen prints in Harlem. I will presume that the screen print itself does not have a copyright notice. The question then becomes publication.
If the work was never published, then it has a 95 year copyright.
When Johnson produced the prints, he probably displayed them, but display is not publication. If he sold this work, then that would be publication, but there's no evidence that he sold this work.
He was ill and declared incompetent in 1947. In 1956, much of his work was turned over by court order to the Harmon Foundation and the foundation got all publication rights. Maybe that turnover was publication, but I view it more as a transfer (https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf page 3) rather than publication. Harmon did use some images for its own purposes, but I do not know if Three Friends was used. If Harmon published the work and included a copyright notice, that notice would cover the image, but Harmon would need to register the copyright.
In 1967, the Harmon Foundation dissolved and gave over 1000 prints to the Smithsonian. Presumably, Three Friends is one of those images. Is that publication? If it was publication, did the gift include a notice that the works were copyright Johnson or Harmon? Works published from 1964 through 1977 with notice have a copyright of 95 years and no requirement to register the works. Did Harmon transfer the copyright to the Smithsonian?
https://thejohnsoncollection.org/william-h-johnson/ states
- The significance of William H. Johnson’s legacy might have been diminished if not for the support of the Harmon Foundation. In 1956, the Foundation was appointed trustee of Johnson’s entire estate. This estate consisted of over one thousand paintings, drawings, and prints that had been moldering in a New York City warehouse for nine years, the rent unpaid and the works untended. After cataloguing, conserving, framing, and safely storing the works, the Foundation lent Johnson’s works to major museum exhibitions and highlighted them in its own presentations and publications. When the Harmon Foundation ceased operations in 1967, it entrusted Johnson’s estate to what is now known as the Smithsonian American Art Museum. The donation agreement stipulated that the museum use the works to inspire people to “raise their sights and . . . feeling for art at the core of life.” That museum remains the largest repository of the artist’s oeuvre.
The Smithsonian may have kept the images in storage until 1991. It had an exhibition that claimed "These never-before-exhibited prints reveal Johnson's work in graphic media to be as powerful as that in oils and tempera." I do not know if Three Friends was in the exhibition.
- https://web.archive.org/web/20140820005256/http://www.americanart.si.edu/exhibitions/online/johnson/index.cfm
- The Art and Life of William H. Johnson. Richard J. Powell. National Museum of American Art, 1991. 255 pp. Cloth, $45.00. https://books.google.com/books?id=lhxQAAAAMAAJ
If first publication was in 1991, then the copyright is 70 years after death. Notice or registration is not required. Johnson died in 1970.
Arguably, if there is a copyright, then the Smithsonian may hold it.
Glrx (talk) 22:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Keep An impressive piece of creative writing there. Most inventive.
- However it ignores one pertinent fact: this was published to Flickr by the Smithsonian (their Flickr channel) and they chose to describe it as having "no known copyright restrictions". Now I have no idea if this is true, nor does Glrx. Such a view would depend on knowing the history of some issues, as described above, and neither of us know these details. However I see no reason to deliberately go against the expressed statement of the Smithsonian themselves. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Comment. A lot of this revolves around the idea of whether is was published. I just wanted to note that per Commons:Public art and copyrights in the US, public display prior to 1978 constituted publication. IronGargoyle (talk) 13:39, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Kept: as per above discussion. --Yann (talk) 15:04, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
La publiqué hace un tiempo y la quiero borrar Nicogollo (talk) 09:16, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Keep. In use, not a recent upload. IronGargoyle (talk) 13:20, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 13:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
Though the author of the text died in 1913, there is no evidence provided that the photograph on the cover is public domain or copyright expired by the photographer. Fæ (talk) 10:24, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Keep This is unnecessarily harsh to delete the entire book for just one photo -- when the image itself is a tiny part of the book, and will fall under DM, when considering it is a 112-page book. If it is much of a problem, the image can be hidden, instead of deleting the entire book. I am not saying ignore copyright, I am saying, just redact copyrighted part instead of deletion. See related DR. In future, Fæ, please consider ways in which a DR can be avoided by editing out some parts of the video/pdf to avoid the copyright problem. I am editing the PDF as I speak, and should be done in some time.
Acagastya (talk) 10:46, 10 May 2021 (UTC)- It's rare for volunteers to edit a book PDF to trim out possible copyrighted sections. If the text contains any clues as to identifying the photographer or subject, that would help this DR and potentially provide a rationale to keep the PDF as printed.
- As the uploader of over a million PDFs, these issues are not unusual on my own projects and many do get deleted because 'fixing' them is a burden on volunteer time. --Fæ (talk) 10:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, it is a burden -- uploading is a burden, so is opening a DR, some burden takes more time than others. But if we are opening a DR for media that can be saved, our first attempt should be to save the media than to delete it. It is burden nonetheless. But better than losing the book.
- Also, it is now redacted. So we can delete old revision, restore it in a few years, and close this DR.
Acagastya (talk) 11:01, 10 May 2021 (UTC)- The redaction is odd, it would have been normal to delete that page and the text states that the photograph is copyrighted, which we do not know. --Fæ (talk) 11:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Feel free to issue a fix Fæ. I think mentioning what was in the image that needed to be redacted and the reason to redact serves as useful information.
Acagastya (talk) 11:09, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Keep I agree with DM. Besides per {{PD-India}} and {{PD-India-photo-1958}} old photos are PD after 50 years. And I think it is likely that this is not a recent photo. --MGA73 (talk) 10:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Do we know the date of this print? It may well be a reprint after 1958 with a newly designed cover (the cover is printed differently to the text content). --Fæ (talk) 11:01, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- No I don't. But do you have indications that the photo is taken after 1958 for example? And it is not a good reason to this book that someone DR your uploads. Sadly someone thinks that COM:PCP means that we have to delete EVERYTHING that MIGHT be copyrighted. We don't... We should delete that where there is significant doubt. So perhaps instead your uploads should not be deleted? --MGA73 (talk) 11:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, there is significant doubt as on page 992 (second to last) there is a reference to Sundar Printing Press in Amritsar in exactly the same print as the rest of the book, and this press is a current business in Amritsar (check it up on Google), so indicates this is a modern print, add to this the text of the last page, which reads as very spammy by the printers. This also must throw up some doubt as to the nature of this transcription or translation, which may not be a direct print of an older text and would need verifying.
- As an administrator, you do not need any reminder that per COM:PRP the burden of evidence is not on proving that copyright exists, but providing reasonable evidence that it does not. This is central to this project's enforcement of copyright policy. --Fæ (talk) 11:37, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I must point out -- while redacting can solve the problem, I am not entirely convinced the image is free -- the burden of the proof lies on someone saying it is free. So I do agree with @Fæ: in that regard.
Acagastya (talk) 11:40, 10 May 2021 (UTC)- That something is reprinted does not mean that it can't be PD. I have of course read COM:PRP and it mentions significant doubt. There is a risk that the photo is new and there is a risk that the photo was old but never published. But do you have any indications of that? For example an en:Electric guitar was invented in 1932 so if someone claimed a photo of an electric guitar was taken in 1920 then there would be significant doubt. Or if there was a photo of an iPad then it would not be likely that the photo is from 1970. If you look at the photo when would you guess that the photo was taken? My guess would be before 1946. --MGA73 (talk) 11:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- The burden is the other way around. There are photographs of me playing the violin printed in black and white, with no iPads in the photograph, that does not mean anyone can upload an unsourced grainy version from social media and claim they must have been taken before WW2.
- Sitars are popular today, and are around 4 feet long. The young woman in the photograph may be older than she looks, as the size of the sitar can make a portrait like this a bit misleading. --Fæ (talk) 13:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- That something is reprinted does not mean that it can't be PD. I have of course read COM:PRP and it mentions significant doubt. There is a risk that the photo is new and there is a risk that the photo was old but never published. But do you have any indications of that? For example an en:Electric guitar was invented in 1932 so if someone claimed a photo of an electric guitar was taken in 1920 then there would be significant doubt. Or if there was a photo of an iPad then it would not be likely that the photo is from 1970. If you look at the photo when would you guess that the photo was taken? My guess would be before 1946. --MGA73 (talk) 11:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I must point out -- while redacting can solve the problem, I am not entirely convinced the image is free -- the burden of the proof lies on someone saying it is free. So I do agree with @Fæ: in that regard.
- No I don't. But do you have indications that the photo is taken after 1958 for example? And it is not a good reason to this book that someone DR your uploads. Sadly someone thinks that COM:PCP means that we have to delete EVERYTHING that MIGHT be copyrighted. We don't... We should delete that where there is significant doubt. So perhaps instead your uploads should not be deleted? --MGA73 (talk) 11:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Do we know the date of this print? It may well be a reprint after 1958 with a newly designed cover (the cover is printed differently to the text content). --Fæ (talk) 11:01, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Acagastya (talk) 12:05, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Fæ @MGA73 @Fæ This is source website of this text which is of the website of a library in present-day Pakistan while the majority of the books have been published in present-day India. Many books in this collection contain an year of publication and all of those are published before 1947. I infer that this collection is of pre-1947 books from the library. So, the image should also be pre-1947. Satdeep Gill (talk) 12:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Having done my own deeper dive, I have no idea why dsrcf is the website now claimed as the source of the eBook, dsrcf is not mentioned on Commons or on the Internet Archive where this scan was uploaded from. The Internet Archive uploader has no apparent connection to the "Dyal Singh Research and Cultural Forum". Further the eBook is not listed on dsrcf.org based on a search for the author's name, so it simply does not look like it ever could have been the source for this scan. Satdeep, exactly why do now you think it is the source?
- Here's my dive based on the source quoted on the image page:
- Given the spammy printer's page on the back and the fact the printer is still making these types of prints in Amritsar, it seems very likely that this print could date from the 1980s or even later. Given the cheap printing methods, page numbers appear added later, the poor quality paper with soft edges to the text, the single colour pages, though the photograph's print pixellation makes it look a bit like a newspaper print photo, it is actually impossible to date. Again the photograph itself might be a 1980s photo taken in B&W and added to the cover in cyan separately from the red borders. The seems to be directly printed on the cover page, rather than glued on, based on the existence of six odd framing marks in blue around the photograph. All this indicates a single colour print method which would not be unusual to still be in use for low print volume runs in India in the 1980s as the conversion to digital print methods has been a slow industrial change, with old equipment kept going much longer than we would expect, say, in Europe.
- The text itself contains no evidence that the photograph relates to the text author.
- Further examining the source, the actual source is "FreePunjabiEBooks.com" which does not actually have very many books and the about us page https://freepunjabiebooks.com/about-us/ says nothing at all about why the chosen eBooks are considered free or where these copies come from. The first page of the site has a gallery of "selected authors", all of whom have modern colour photographs, throwing doubt on what "free" might mean to the site creators. Examining the other 155 uploads by the same IA uploader (https://archive.org/details/@stalinjeet_brar, Free Punjabi Ebooks, presumably the creator of the source website) lacks common context, these seem to vary between self publications where the original says nothing clear about copyright, but include mobile phone numbers and a price for the book, or reused texts and reused images which might be out of copyright or have copyright waived, but again there's nothing verifiable as no true sources are given. Some have been given an attribution requirement, like https://archive.org/details/meenh-vich-ki-gayiye, but the source book itself appears to not include any copyright statement (which as per UK law is not a requirement for the text to be copyrighted).
- We should advise that even where books on the Internet Archive appear old-ish, where the metadata says nothing about dates or licensing, we need to avoid uploading these PDFs unless there is a clear copyright rationale that the uploader can provide.
- --Fæ (talk) 12:46, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Acagastya: Proof can go both ways. In some cases you can proof that the photo can't be older than <year> and in other cases you can prove that the photo can't be newer than <year>. For example a photo of an electric guitar can't be older than 1932 and a photo of the Twin Towers can't be more recent than 2001. Those are good proof that someone is incorrect if they claim otherwise and in such cases we have significant doubt.
- I'm not arguing that it is not possible that the photo is later than 1950. I'm simply arguing that we have no proof or strong indications that the photo is more recent. This is a case where there is doubt. My question is if the doubt is significant. Personally I think it is likely that it is old enought to be PD. But I can't be 100% sure. But I do not have to be 100% sure. I just need to feel confident that there is not significant doubt. Here we have a photo that looks old and a publisher that have not mentioned copyright. Personally I would assume that a publisher check copyright before publishing anything so when there is no notice of copyright that leads me to think that publisher found the photo to be PD. If I were to publish an old book I would personally not use a recent photo but try to find an old one to match. So I do not think it is likely that it is taken in the 1080s. Also as menioned above most books are pre 1947 so that makes it likely this book (and photo) is also pre 1947.
- If someone find proof that the publisher is a serial copyright violator or if someone send a take down notice with proof that they are the copyright holder then I would of course not vote keep. --MGA73 (talk) 13:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- "I'm simply arguing that we have no proof or strong indications that the photo is more recent" -- likewise, we have no proof or strong indication that the photo is void of copyright restrictions -- in a stalemate situation like this, it is better to be cautious than to assume things will be in our favour.
Acagastya (talk) 13:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- "I'm simply arguing that we have no proof or strong indications that the photo is more recent" -- likewise, we have no proof or strong indication that the photo is void of copyright restrictions -- in a stalemate situation like this, it is better to be cautious than to assume things will be in our favour.
- "most books are pre 1947" is incorrect. Please actually check the source before making definitive-looking statements that may mislead others. @stalinjeet_brar uploaded 156 scans, 46 dated as published 2020 (those I checked this date was factually wrong) and 88 have no date. --Fæ (talk) 13:23, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I do not speak hindi but if the books are from 2020 they have really done a bad work. To me it looks like a scan of an old books. --MGA73 (talk) 14:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- You seem to be looking at some other site rather than the source given. For example this book is one of the 156 uploads to IA and it was published in 2015. It is not the scan of an "old book". Coincidentally the translator is named as Satdeep Gill. (BTW this DR is about a Punjabi text not Hindi) --Fæ (talk) 17:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Fæ: Few years ago, for the purpose of academics, Satdeep was translating various books, this would be one of those. It should be noted, the translations are licensed under CC BY, and this could be tricky, but translation has its own copyright but it is still DW, so I don't know if one could license it under a free license or not.
Acagastya (talk) 18:54, 10 May 2021 (UTC)- @Acagastya @Fæ Some context was missing, I and a friend manage FreePunjabiEbooks on Internet Archive and yes there are certain Creative Commons books there that have been translated by me. For this book, I have added the correct source in Internet Archive. The book is originally for the mentioned library in Lahore. Here is exact book url on that website: http://dsrcf.org/book.php?bid=588 (Now, only a few pages are available) Based on their complete collection, all the books appear to be pre-1947. But if someone really want to dig in, then perhaps we can try contacting them: http://dsrcf.org/contact_us.php. Satdeep Gill (talk) 10:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- The lack of transparency about personal involvement in off-wiki websites leaves me feeling uncomfortable, considering this DR was created during a Commons Request for Adminship. Commons does not have governance-related requirements in these circumstances, and you are free to say little or nothing at all about these matters, so I'm going to refrain from researching this any further. --Fæ (talk) 11:35, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Acagastya @Fæ Some context was missing, I and a friend manage FreePunjabiEbooks on Internet Archive and yes there are certain Creative Commons books there that have been translated by me. For this book, I have added the correct source in Internet Archive. The book is originally for the mentioned library in Lahore. Here is exact book url on that website: http://dsrcf.org/book.php?bid=588 (Now, only a few pages are available) Based on their complete collection, all the books appear to be pre-1947. But if someone really want to dig in, then perhaps we can try contacting them: http://dsrcf.org/contact_us.php. Satdeep Gill (talk) 10:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Fæ: Few years ago, for the purpose of academics, Satdeep was translating various books, this would be one of those. It should be noted, the translations are licensed under CC BY, and this could be tricky, but translation has its own copyright but it is still DW, so I don't know if one could license it under a free license or not.
- You seem to be looking at some other site rather than the source given. For example this book is one of the 156 uploads to IA and it was published in 2015. It is not the scan of an "old book". Coincidentally the translator is named as Satdeep Gill. (BTW this DR is about a Punjabi text not Hindi) --Fæ (talk) 17:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I do not speak hindi but if the books are from 2020 they have really done a bad work. To me it looks like a scan of an old books. --MGA73 (talk) 14:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion, deleted the version with the possibly copyrighted front page. --Ellywa (talk) 22:11, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
Metadata indicates "Author: LITO SY" and "Copyright holder: LITO SY". Searching on Google yields both [7] and [8] (though it seems these belong to the same photographer as the indicated firm is "Lito Sy Photography Inc.") In any case, for the latter Lito Sy is a professional photographer based in Davao City, and his about page indicates various politicians as among his clients, including Sen. w:Bong Revilla. Thus this portrait of Sen. Zubiri may also be his photo (again see the incomplete metadata). There's no indication that Lito Sy had worked in the government as a regular employee (instead he is a professional photographer who is open for all various services, including services from politicians). Thus {{PD-PhilippinesGov}} is invalid. Image lacks permission from the professional photographer. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Uploader - still active - did not comment to explain authorship. --Ellywa (talk) 22:13, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Pokémon Go
[edit]These photographs of phones running Pokemon Go surpass COM:TOO US. It is true that the SVG upload does not, but these files contain gradients and additional features on the word "GO" that had to be specifically removed in order for the SVG to be acceptable. See the American Airlines case.
- File:App-augmented-reality-game-gps-163042 (cropped).jpg
- File:App-augmented-reality-game-gps-163042.jpg
- File:Pokémon GO (28052812062).jpg
- File:Pokémon Go App.jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Anarchyte (talk • work) 12:23, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- Keep first 2 images as I've replaced the logo with the SVG version, Cannot do the same with #3 and #4 because of the phone angle. –Davey2010Talk 15:11, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, Davey2010. Assuming no one finds any TOO concerns with the rest of the screenshot of the application (i.e. the green gradient), I'm happy to withdraw the deletion request for those two images. Anarchyte (talk • work) 16:26, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Anarchyte, No worries, If you mean the phone background colour than no that would be okay as it cannot be copyrighted at least I don't think it can, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 17:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, I think that'd be pushing the reaches of US TOO. Anarchyte (talk • work) 06:48, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Anarchyte, No worries, If you mean the phone background colour than no that would be okay as it cannot be copyrighted at least I don't think it can, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 17:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- The 3rd one may qualify under some type of de minimus - the logo is not the focus of the shot (it is the overall app screen) it is obscured by the thumb reflection on the screen, and skewed in such a way to make it difficult to pull out for reuse. (The fourth one being very clear on the logo , is not). --Masem (talk) 13:04, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Masem: It would almost definitely not qualify as de minimis. The photo's topic is the Pokemon Go app, and the logo is front and centre. See this as an example of how restrictive de minimis is. Anarchyte (talk • work) 13:30, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. Deleted the last two totally, and of the first two the older version with copyrighted / shaded versions of the non-free logo which appears above TOO. --Ellywa (talk) 22:20, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
Source page provides thumbnail only. Metadata states author and copyright holder as "Ivo Hercik, hello@ivohercik.com". Imo OTRS needed. Gumruch (talk) 20:59, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- I believe that OTRS is not necessary, since in this case it was specifically provided to the President of the Czech Republic, and then to the President of Russia. The kremlin.ru always contains free materials, whether produced by them or not, with the exception of such materials, the copyright holders of which are TASS and Ria Novosti (see here) (when they attribute them under published photos; well, in fact, most of the daily photos are on Kremlin.ru made by employees of TASS or Ria Novosti). Although this is not clearly stated in the terms, but whether users or organizations, they voluntarily publish materials on Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.
Take Donald Trump for example (http://en.kremlin.ru/catalog/persons/498) - the first official portrait, PD. Joe Biden (http://en.kremlin.ru/catalog/persons/245) - judging by the background, it is cut from a photo from a meeting with Vladimir Putin when he was still prime minister, so own work. Viktor Orban (http://en.kremlin.ru/catalog/persons/424) - photo from the meeting with Vladimir Putin, own work. Okay, own work is clear, but what about the provided ones? Former President of Kyrgyzstan Sooronbay Jeenbekov (http://en.kremlin.ru/catalog/persons/540) - this is an official photo from gov.kg, when he was still prime minister. They provided it to the Russian side, and therefore, it's now available under a free license, and we need to attribute not only the authorship of the Presidency of Russia, but also the authorship of the Presidency of Kyrgyzstan. Former President of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan (http://en.kremlin.ru/catalog/persons/110) - official photo from president.am which was available under CC-BY-ND 3.0 but now CC-BY-SA-3.0. So the same stuff. Therefore, I suggest to Keep it, the Press Service of the Kremlin won't just steal a photo of a Czech photographer. Kuban Animator (talk)
- @Kuban Animator: Can you explain where did you take the file in hi-res from? Kremlin offers thumbnail only. It can be available under CC license in presented size only. Gumruch (talk) 21:49, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
- There is no point in removing the photo, but if you're in doubt, you can put (overwrite) a small "thumbnail", but then the image will lose its illustrative meaning. Kuban Animator (talk) 14:55, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Kuban Animator: Can you explain where did you take the file in hi-res from? Kremlin offers thumbnail only. It can be available under CC license in presented size only. Gumruch (talk) 21:49, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and discussion. It is not a task for the admin to replace the image. Please do any of you. --Ellywa (talk) 22:27, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
