Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2022/02/27
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
s.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_4250_on_the_Q60_without_decal_scheme.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
_(page_6_crop).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![200 File:Лента медали "За Заслуги".jpg](#File:Лента_медали_"За_Заслуги".jpg){kind=link}
![201 File:Лента ордена "Верность и Вера" второй степени.jpg](#File:Лента_ордена_"Верность_и_Вера"_второй_степени.jpg){kind=link}
![215 File:Орден "Верность и Вера" второй степени.jpg](#File:Орден_"Верность_и_Вера"_второй_степени.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, vandalism-only account. --Rosenzweig τ 00:31, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
{{Block}} Rosenzweign (talk) 04:29, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Keep New user in either the usual rockie mistakes or on moral crusade. Either way, no reason valid to delete. Tm (talk) 06:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC)- Keep Reason given is nonsense. Tabercil (talk) 06:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Vandalism. --Achim55 (talk) 08:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
{{Block}} Rosenzweign (talk) 04:30, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep New user in either the usual rockie mistakes or on moral crusade. Either way, no reason valid to delete. Tm (talk) 06:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Reason given is nonsense. Tabercil (talk) 06:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Vandalism. --Achim55 (talk) 08:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
{{Block}} Rosenzweign (talk) 04:31, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep New user in either the usual rockie mistakes or on moral crusade. Either way, no reason valid to delete. Tm (talk) 06:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
{{Block}} Rosenzweign (talk) 04:31, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg-1){kind=link}
- Keep New user in either the usual rockie mistakes or on moral crusade. Either way, no reason valid to delete. Tm (talk) 06:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Reason given is nonsense. Tabercil (talk) 06:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Vandalism. --Achim55 (talk) 08:23, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
pornographic image which can be viewed by minors. --Mykee881211 21:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. Simple nudity does not equal pornography, and Commons is not censored. Tabercil (talk) 02:28, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
- Keep, assuming that this person is at least moderately notable. - Jmabel ! talk 04:32, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Not a valid deletion reason. --Martin H. (talk) 19:36, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
{{Block}} Rosenzweign (talk) 04:32, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Reason given is nonsense. Tabercil (talk) 06:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Vandalism. --Achim55 (talk) 08:25, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Inappropriate Idro10 (talk) 18:04, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep. Commons is not censored (COM:CENSOR) and hosts a wide variety of sexually explicit images. The image is high quality and COM:OTRS has confirmed that there is no issue with permissions. The image depicts something that isn't well-represented on Commons (sexual intercourse between a trans man and cis man), and per COM:NUDITY a file that is sufficiently different from existing files should generally be kept. WanderingWanda (talk) 00:09, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. Wikipedia is not censored. Satyricon2 (talk) 12:04, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 09:10, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
{{Delete}} Pagegez (talk) 02:25, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
{{Delete}} Pagegez (talk) 02:35, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
{{Block}} Rosenzweign (talk) 04:33, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. ...Uh, not really sure what's going on here, but I stand by what I wrote above. WanderingWanda (talk) 04:40, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Reason given is nonsense. Tabercil (talk) 06:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Vandalism. --Achim55 (talk) 08:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
s.jpg){kind=link}
s.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Rosenzweign (talk) 04:34, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
s.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep New user in either the usual rockie mistakes or on moral crusade. Either way, no reason valid to delete. Tm (talk) 06:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Reason given is nonsense - it doesn't matter if the contributor has been blocked or not. The image is still perfectly usable by Commons. And in this instance we have an OTRS ticket as back up. Tabercil (talk) 06:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 07:49, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
s.jpg){kind=link}
Rosenzweign (talk) 04:35, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep New user in either the usual rockie mistakes or on moral crusade. Either way, no reason valid to delete. Tm (talk) 06:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 07:50, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
{{Block}} Rosenzweign (talk) 04:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep New user in either the usual rockie mistakes or on moral crusade. Either way, no reason valid to delete. Tm (talk) 06:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Reason given is nonsense. Tabercil (talk) 06:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Vandalism. --Achim55 (talk) 08:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
{{Block}} Rosenzweign (talk) 04:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep New user in either the usual rockie mistakes or on moral crusade. Either way, no reason valid to delete. Tm (talk) 06:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Reason given is nonsense. Tabercil (talk) 06:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Vandalism. --Achim55 (talk) 08:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Hmm… where to start: we have COM:PORN, COM:OOS, vandalism, w:WP:NOTHERE, probably at least one country’s obscenity laws, and last but not least UGHHHH FUCKING WHY (PS if you’re running into this on the deletion list page the title apparently means “poop tasting” which is all you need to know before clicking the link) Dronebogus (talk) 06:13, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Delete Lovely - an image which makes the classic Goatse seem tame and reasonable. If anything defines the phrase "Out of Scope", it's this. Delete and salt. Tabercil (talk) 07:04, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 07:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Advertising for user’s personal COM:PORN, worthless Dronebogus (talk) 06:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 07:54, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- also copy file:Cambodian Premier League Logo.png
Complex logos can be in Commons only with VRT-permission. Taivo (talk) 08:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. reuploaded several times by socks. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 09:08, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Soft porn .. frontal nudity 2405:201:6806:5065:C518:9687:6549:187 06:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Commons is not censored, in use. --Achim55 (talk) 13:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Ensayo personal; fuera del alcance del proyecto. Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 23:45, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:04, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
File page without file. Leonel Sohns 11:06, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Achim55 (talk) 16:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
https://images.bbtmedia.com/node/29039 reads "This image is copyrighted. Do not use without clearance from BBTI's Rights and Permissions Department." Achim55 (talk) 18:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Also affected: File:A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.jpg --Achim55 (talk) 19:11, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 20:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyright violation Dronebogus (talk) 06:23, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted by EugeneZelenko at 16:47, 27 February 2022 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing (F1): Non-trivial logo --Krdbot 21:04, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Copyvio. Dronebogus (talk) 06:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by EugeneZelenko at 16:47, 27 February 2022 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing (F1): Anime/manga/comics --Krdbot 21:04, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Lo sentimos, esta imagen no es interesante para una enciclopedia Inc 12345* (talk) 23:08, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted per uploader request; unused, not of evident in-scope importance. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 23:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Déjà vu • ✉ 17:15, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination--speedy as nonfree cover-art. --DMacks (talk) 01:20, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
{{Delete}} Pagegez (talk) 02:14, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Vandalism. --Achim55 (talk) 17:59, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleting. Archivo robado de Facebook 191.126.159.40 19:07, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
Info: Image search: Google negative, Tineye negative, Yandex negative, Bing negative, Sogou negative, Alamy negative, Getty negative. --Achim55 (talk) 19:35, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Invalid nomination. (non-admin closure)--Kadı (talk) 21:24, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
Facebook metadata means file has been uploaded to the net before coming here. Thus "facebook file" is a valid basis for a deletion request. Noobs should avoid closing discussions or face being sanctioned for it. Frog informs (talk) 13:45, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Trolling, Vandalism. (non - admin closure) --Kadı (talk) 18:54, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Potential copyright violation: video is taken from a private Vkontakte account, there is no free/CC license and the uploader is not identified as the author of the video. Deinocheirus (talk) 19:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: Lacking permission; post just states "Военный Осведомитель ©". 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:40, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- No one reason to think that this is a free video.— Redboston 00:22, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Speedy delete Should have been tagged under {{No permission}}.廣九直通車 (talk) 10:02, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: the source website absolutely did not claim this video had been created by him. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 22:19, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Dr. Coal as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: File not found on the source. Not a valid reason for speedy, PD-Turkey should be verified though. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:24, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep PD-Turkey is correct. --RAN (talk) 02:10, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- This file was deleted. PD-Turkey is incorrect according to the deletion discussion, @King of Hearts @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). Kadı (talk) 07:11, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- That deletion was incorrect, it was based on the false premise that all images are 70 years pma in Turkey and the debate was closed before any actual !voting took place. "The protection period is 70 years from the date that the work is published". The deletion was also based on the false premise that when you scan an image, the derivative copy you make is not your own work, it is, even though it does not transfer the copyright on the original image to you, or restart the copyright clock. Publication, according to the Berne Convention is being made available to the public. If an image is transferred from the photographer's negative to a print, and sent to the sitter, it is made public. If we knew that the image was never made public, like the negative was scanned from an archive of the original photographer's collection, I would agree it may have never been made public. For instance the Bain Collection at the Library of Congress is made from scans of the original glass negatives and Getty Images buys whole collections of photographer's negatives for their commercial archive. --RAN (talk) 07:33, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- This picture is in my family archive, @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). I understood that this picture is suitable for commons. Right? Kadı (talk) 07:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, you are correct. You can probably make a better scan it seems out-of-focus. --RAN (talk) 07:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). Now, I am changing the source info. In addition, I have notable people in my family, so I am going to upload their portraits also. Kind regards. Kadı (talk) 07:42, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, you are correct. You can probably make a better scan it seems out-of-focus. --RAN (talk) 07:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- This picture is in my family archive, @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). I understood that this picture is suitable for commons. Right? Kadı (talk) 07:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Don't forget to create Wikidata entries for them, do you have a free account at Familysearch? You should add them there also. Scan images at the highest resolution, 300 dpi and store as a png file. --RAN (talk) 08:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), They have wikidata entries (Kamil Tolon, Şefik Kamil Efes, Efesbank, Nilgün Efes, Ercan Aktuna, Cüneyt Ölçer, Nazan Ölçer) I'll also look at Familysearch. Thanks! Kadı (talk) 08:13, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
The file was uploaded by User:Bebakkkk not User:Kadı unless they are the same person... Frog informs (talk) 13:56, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Old account :) @Frog informs Kadı (talk) 16:09, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- It looks like people from Syria and Turkey are banned from having their information in Familysearch made public. As soon as I add where he was born the profile gets marked "confidential", this must have something to do with religious persecution of LDS members in those two countries. I am not LDS, I just use their software. --RAN (talk) 21:56, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, @Christian Ferrer. Could the discussion be closed? Could you evaluate? Sincerely, Kadı (talk) 17:52, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Clindberg: hello, I was going to delete the file because for me it don't macth the points 1, 2 and 4 of {{PD-Turkey}}, however the point 3 "In cases stated in the first paragraph of article 12..." is not clear to me. What do you think? what is a "duplicator"? Thanks in advance. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:53, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Christian Ferrer, I know Turkish. [1] Duplicator means uploader. This photo is in our family archive. Kadı (talk) 19:30, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
- Article 12 is for anonymous works, basically. It's where the author is not known; the publisher in that case can exercise the rights. And I guess if there is no obvious publisher, it goes to the "duplicator", which seems to mean whoever makes the copy in question. The 2014 wipolex text translates it as "by the person making the reproduction". The term (in article 27) for those is 70 years from publication. That is also the term for corporate-owned works. Guessing at whether studio portraits were "published" or not, is a rather hard question. The Berne Convention more defines publication as copies made available to the general public, which probably isn't met. I do find it hard to grasp though that the photographer could sell the photo to the sitter, but still have an unlimited unpublished copyright term on it. In U.S. law, selling copies is almost always publication. If copyright was deemed to be owned by the commissioning party, then it well could be unpublished for a long time. But it sounds like, if this was from a family archive, either copyright has expired via the 70 years rule, or the uploader has rights to license it (either owning via being commissioned, or by the "duplicator" provision). So, probably a Keep either way. Carl Lindberg (talk) 07:41, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- Article 12 is for anonymous works, basically. It's where the author is not known; the publisher in that case can exercise the rights. And I guess if there is no obvious publisher, it goes to the "duplicator", which seems to mean whoever makes the copy in question. The 2014 wipolex text translates it as "by the person making the reproduction". The term (in article 27) for those is 70 years from publication. That is also the term for corporate-owned works. Guessing at whether studio portraits were "published" or not, is a rather hard question. The Berne Convention more defines publication as copies made available to the general public, which probably isn't met. I do find it hard to grasp though that the photographer could sell the photo to the sitter, but still have an unlimited unpublished copyright term on it. In U.S. law, selling copies is almost always publication. If copyright was deemed to be owned by the commissioning party, then it well could be unpublished for a long time. But it sounds like, if this was from a family archive, either copyright has expired via the 70 years rule, or the uploader has rights to license it (either owning via being commissioned, or by the "duplicator" provision). So, probably a
Kept: ok, as per Carl, thanks to him for his answer. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:33, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Kester Rajan
[edit]Professional portraits, many of which were published on the subject's Instagram prior to the Commons upload date. Requires COM:VRT permission. However, these are likely out of scope anyway. The category should go as well.
- File:Kester rajan at guitars.jpg
- File:Kester rajan musician.jpg
- File:Kester rajan singer on studio.jpg
- File:Kester rajan singer.jpg
- File:Kester-rajan-singer.jpg
- File:Kester-rajansinger.jpg
- File:Kester.image.jpg
- File:Kesterprofile.jpg
- File:Kesterrajan at guitar.jpg
- File:Kesterrajan with guitar.jpg
- File:Kesterrajan-singer.jpg
- File:Kesterrajan.in.jpg
- File:Kesterrajansinger in studio.jpg
✗plicit 05:54, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 07:37, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
Film poster containing copyrighted image(s) - no evidence uploader has the authority to place image in Commons Tabercil (talk) 15:30, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 02:44, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
The description says "Uploaded a work by U.S. Signal Corps photo. from", "A clipped image". In fact, this image is not only a cropped photo, but also a remake of it. Thus, this image is no longer a real photograph, but a processed picture. 176.52.35.224 05:23, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Not a comprehensible deletion rationale. --RAN (talk) 06:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep --Achim55 (talk) 12:54, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- So how does this affect the compliance with Commons' policies/COM:SCOPE? Keep. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:28, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:13, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Hunterprincekhalidbihar (talk · contribs)
[edit]SD|F10 (personal photos by non-contributors)
- File:Deepak Pandit Entrepreneur.jpg
- File:Deepak Pandit.jpg
- File:Dr sitanshu singh.jpg
- File:Hunter Prince Khalid.jpg
JopkeB (talk) 10:31, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:15, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Out of Scope. No encyclopaedic use. Dandelo (talk) 14:42, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:18, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Out of Scope. No encyclopaedic use. Dandelo (talk) 14:42, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:19, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of Scope. No encyclopaedic use. Dandelo (talk) 14:43, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:19, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of Scope. No encyclopaedic use. Dandelo (talk) 14:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:19, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Out of Scope. No encyclopaedic use. Dandelo (talk) 14:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:21, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of Scope. No encyclopaedic use. Dandelo (talk) 14:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:22, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of Scope. No encyclopaedic use. Dandelo (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:22, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
siline madde 6ye istinaden 94.54.60.158 19:19, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
Fan fiction flag. Beshogur (talk) 11:03, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, hoax, such imamate does not exist. I'll delete also file:Imamate of Aqchayistan vertical flag.png due to same reason. Taivo (talk) 09:21, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
Ceci est une ancienne version, la nouvelle numérisation est de meilleur qualité; Voir les fichiers affiliés à Rion des Landes Romacq.40370 (talk) 13:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I see other images of this location, but not this exact image, why delete it? --RAN (talk) 17:17, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Bonjour, j'ai fait un nouveau scan de cette carte postale, la nouvelle est de meilleur qualité dont les couleurs sont plus vives. Je demande la suppression de l'ancienne version pour ne pas surcharger Wikipédia avec des doublons. Romacq.40370 (talk) 19:12, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
Kept: If I understand this correctly, the request was to delete the inferior version, namely File:Rion des Landes, place de l'église, début XX.jpg, and to keep this one as the better quality scan. As I see it, the author seems to be a photographer named Ocana from a town called Dax, which is not far from Rion-des-Landes. This page says his name was Edouard Ocana and that he was born 1869-04-01 in Madrid, Spain, came to France in the 1890s and finally to Dax ca. 1900, where he worked as a photographer until the early 1920s. That all fits for a photograph claimed to be from 1908. He had four sons who were also photographers, but not old enough in 1908. Edouard Ocana died in 1941. --Rosenzweig τ 19:42, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 09:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:47, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Scottish police institute (talk · contribs)
[edit]SD|F10 (personal photos by non-contributors)
- File:2021-crime and detection centre Lahore .webp
- File:2021 Meeting of research at juvenile delinquents in Punjab lahore.1-2--2-1.webp
JopkeB (talk) 10:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:46, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Dubious ownwork as the user has uploaded a lot of copyrighted images Sahaib3005 (talk) 18:08, 27 February 2022 (UTC) Update: I found the image online https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/performs-at-the-ovo-wembley-arena-on-february-25-2022-in-news-photo/1372934905 and have replaced the deletion request with the copyvio tag instead. Sahaib3005 (talk) 18:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by Yann. --Gbawden (talk) 11:41, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope.--Nooritahir433215 (talk) 18:53, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Weak delete. --Gbawden (talk) 11:41, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
book pages are copyright protected Carl Ha (talk) 19:28, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete Published in 1970 according to description; cf. COM:Germany. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:41, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
flickr user doesn't seem to be the real author of the book page, just the person who scanned it Carl Ha (talk) 19:29, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:40, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
out of scope, low quality Xocolatl (talk) 19:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete F10. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:34, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:37, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Is scope? Trabajo propio? 191.126.13.103 20:10, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:36, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Is scope? Trabajo propio? 191.126.13.103 20:11, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:35, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Copyright 2022 SA LA NACION | Todos los derechos reservados 191.126.13.103 20:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:35, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
(Foto: Azteca TV) Trabajo propio? 191.126.13.103 20:14, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:47, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Italiano: (imprenditore -politico ) Trabajo propio? Is scope? 191.126.13.103 20:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:35, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Español: Foto de perfil de Leonardo Caparrós 191.126.13.103 20:17, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, scope?. --Gbawden (talk) 11:34, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Original transmission location code 9HbXLMgaxXRs1Ft9tcI- 191.126.13.103 20:19, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and scope. --Gbawden (talk) 11:34, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Is scope? 191.126.13.103 20:19, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:32, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Bonito dibujo 191.126.13.103 20:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:32, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Obra de arte? 191.126.13.103 20:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:32, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
El ojo de Leonardo? 191.126.13.103 20:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; not own work. --Gbawden (talk) 11:29, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Vandalismo Aitorembe (talk) 21:15, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Icono usado por un grupo de vándalos. --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 08:10, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:28, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Vandalismo Aitorembe (talk) 21:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Icono usado por un grupo de vándalos. --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 08:11, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:28, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Vandalismo Aitorembe (talk) 21:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: Copyvio; found by TinEye back in 2014, two years before the upload. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:31, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:27, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
promotion only, out of scope Jan Myšák (talk) 21:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: Additionally, lack of permission from book covers' copyright owner. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:29, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:27, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
promotion only, out of scope Jan Myšák (talk) 21:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: Additionally, lack of permission from book covers' copyright owner. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:29, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:27, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Tin Eye reverse image search found this image was used online in 2014 at the vintageguitar.com website. https://tineye.com/search/116c2034a052eecb4f281716489ea54e9c7f3a54?sort=score&order=desc&page=1 Binksternet (talk) 21:25, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete: Copyvio. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:42, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:18, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Tin Eye reverse image search found that this image was taken from thebabysofficial.com website. https://tineye.com/search/52703b6a504bd43c59073ec457946a494e08431c?sort=score&order=desc&page=1 Binksternet (talk) 21:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete: Copyvio. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:18, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No encyclopedic value; just a random artistic photo scraped from Flickr jsut because we supposedly legally could. Mangoe (talk) 21:39, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep: Per COM:SCOPE, the file has to be of educational, not necessarily encyclopaedic value, and I can see this being used in a presentation about parties/their environmental impact/etc. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Weak keep. --Gbawden (talk) 11:47, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Non-notable person. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 22:13, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: No evidence of permission/claimed licensing on the linked source either. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 00:44, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:18, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable person. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 22:13, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: No evidence of permission/claimed licensing on the linked source either. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 00:45, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:18, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Dronebogus (talk) 22:30, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:10, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Copy vio from This site Kotofey2016 (talk) 22:49, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:11, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Photo by John Philipps / Getty Images (https://www.gettyimages.de/detail/nachrichtenfoto/salomé-dewaels-attends-the-photocall-of-illusions-nachrichtenfoto/1338433976?adppopup=true=). Copyright violation by uploader. Paulae (talk) 09:43, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:13, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Photo by André Atangana but no proof that Atangana allowed the upload under a free licence. Uploader is not photographer. Paulae (talk) 09:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:14, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Studio shoot, online available in better quality. Uploader is not the photographer and has uploaded a lot of copyvios, so very likely copyright vio too. Paulae (talk) 09:50, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:14, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Apparently uploaded for promotion; no signs of educational usage. Logo can also be found at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PTuKYfjSVk. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:28, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:20, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Likely copyvio, same image appears at least five years earlier online at https://auto.economictimes.indiatimes.com/slide-shows/top-exits-resignations-in-auto-inc-in-2016/56419794 and https://amcn.com.au/editorial/8-reasons-royal-enfield-wants-next-big-thing/ Lord Belbury (talk) 12:36, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:19, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by NetherDragons (talk · contribs)
[edit]Logos / graphics claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope.
mattbr 12:54, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:21, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 12:56, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:20, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 12:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:20, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kreative Essence Motion Pictures (talk · contribs)
[edit]Logos / graphics claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope.
mattbr 13:04, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:20, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 13:06, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:21, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 13:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:21, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Partei Gesunder Menschenverstand (talk · contribs)
[edit]Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope.
- File:Kreis hohe auflösungGMD-1.5.jpg
- File:Kreis hohe auflösungGMD-2.5.jpg
- File:Kreis hohe auflösungGMD-2.0.jpg
- File:Kreis hohe auflösungGMD 2 0.jpg
- File:Kreis hohe auflösungGMD 1 5.jpg
- File:Kreis hohe auflösungGMD 2 5.jpg
- File:Kreis hohe auflösungGMD.jpg
mattbr 13:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:23, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Barry Lorde (talk · contribs)
[edit]Either a screenshot of somebody else's writing, or a piece of personal writing. Both would be out of COM:SCOPE.
Lord Belbury (talk) 13:17, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:21, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Informproekt (talk · contribs)
[edit]Uncredited, complex clipart, two items of which appear elsewhere online (factory at https://www.10in6.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Streamline-Issue-Resolution-In-Your-Plant-80x80.png, hard hat worker at https://cogenesis.com.au/site/cloud-services/windows-virtual-desktop).
Lord Belbury (talk) 13:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:23, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Informproekt (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos. Should be in SVG if useful.
- File:Иконки Инвест площадок.png
- File:Заголовок3.png
- File:Заголовок финал.png
- File:Заголовок2.png
- File:Заголовк.png
- File:Буква Н.png
- File:Фонд имущества.png
- File:Грин3.png
- File:Браун2.png
- File:Гринфилд.png
- File:Браунфилд.png
- File:Нежилой объект2.png
- File:Нежилой объект.png
- File:Жилой объект.png
- File:Мел полезные ископаемые.png
- File:Diatomit.png
- File:Gliny.png
- File:Opoka.png
- File:Kirpich.png
- File:Peski.png
- File:Пески условный знак.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:15, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 07:53, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Logo, book cover and product images / graphics claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope.
mattbr 13:25, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:17, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Redundant to File:LOGO KREMPEL-Group-2014-Internet blau.png. No usage on Wikimedia projects.
mattbr 13:28, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:17, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Personal correspondence. Out of COM:SCOPE. Lord Belbury (talk) 15:03, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Support Mitar (talk) 15:13, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:17, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Duplicate - images of this flag already present on Commons which are of higher quality, such as File:Flag of South Africa.svg Tabercil (talk) 15:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:24, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
_4250_on_the_Q60_without_decal_scheme.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_4250_on_the_Q60_without_decal_scheme.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
this is a terrible picture which i believe no longer benifits not only the users of commons, but for anyone who encounters this picture. Electric2010 (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
_4250_on_the_Q60_without_decal_scheme.jpg){kind=link}
further explanation:
i took this picture out of haste to upload so people can have an insight one what an MTA bus without a decal scheme would look like in 2022. however, the picture itself is useless now and no longer serves any purpose in helping anyone. it is no longer something that belongs here and i would like to delete it.
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:24, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
_4250_on_the_Q60_without_decal_scheme.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Per COM:CUR Nigeria Ox1997cow (talk) 16:13, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:25, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Per COM:CUR Nigeria Ox1997cow (talk) 16:13, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:25, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Per COM:CUR Nigeria Ox1997cow (talk) 16:14, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:25, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Unused low-res that can be replaced with images here Category:Nintendo DSi
Might be a COM:NETCOPYVIO. Seems like a stock/press kit image. Example Ryūkotsusei (talk) 16:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Withdraw since the SVG code is valid. Ryūkotsusei (talk) 16:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Withdrawn. --Gbawden (talk) 12:25, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Duncan.Hull (talk · contribs)
[edit]Doubtful authorship. In user flickr photostream can found very low resolution photos, derivative images, screenshots, covers, images from other sites (under a free license without the permission of the original authors) - obviously not original works. In particular, the exif data of one of the photographs indicated original author with contact details.
- File:Sattler.png
- File:Jjmiles.png
- File:RobertDavidStevens.png
- File:DouglasBruceKell.jpg
- File:PedroPedrosaMendes.jpeg
- File:Ewan birney.jpeg
- File:Threlfall's Brewery Company Limited, Salford, UK.jpg
Art-top (talk) 20:16, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 06:07, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Duncan.Hull (talk · contribs)
[edit]COM:TOYS; copyrighted design of LEGO Minifigures.
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:54, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:19, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Photo with copyright, see https://slub.qucosa.de/nutzungshinweise-fuer-die-digitalen-objekte-in-qucosa/#c66 .A release to commons is needed. Tohma (talk) 17:02, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:19, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
German YouTube screenshot, "Abonnieren" button visible in the bottom right. No source video specified but https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCD9lKhNGqdz44PwacQ-ag_A does not appear to upload her work under a CC licence as uploader claims. Lord Belbury (talk) 12:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 14:43, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 08:32, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:37, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 08:33, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:37, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Redundant to File:Koyou rentia corporate logo.png. No usage on Wikimedia projects. mattbr 08:35, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:37, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 08:36, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:36, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 08:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:36, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 08:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:36, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Moonlight Enelion (talk · contribs)
[edit]copyviolence, copied images
Barbarian (talk) 08:43, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:36, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 08:43, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:36, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
non enciclopedico Alexdechi (talk) 08:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:36, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Possible copyvio: Background with the logo of Codelco CoffeeEngineer (talk) 09:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination and scope?. --Gbawden (talk) 06:35, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Possible copyvio: Background with the logo of Codelco CoffeeEngineer (talk) 09:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:35, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 09:06, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:35, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 09:13, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:36, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/File:Knoxville_Police
[edit]Logo for Knoxville Police Department claimed as 'own work'. No evidence of permission and no evidence that this work is in the public domain.
mattbr 09:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:15, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 09:30, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:14, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 09:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:15, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Photo by John Philipps/Getty Images (https://www.gettyimages.de/detail/nachrichtenfoto/salomé-dewaels-attends-the-photocall-of-illusions-nachrichtenfoto/1338433972?adppopup=true). Copyright violation by uploader. Paulae (talk) 09:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:15, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Embarrassing photograph, I think this is not according to privacy laws JopkeB (talk) 10:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Ni es trabajo propio. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 191.126.13.103 (talk) 20:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Likely copyvio. --Gbawden (talk) 07:16, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work of an old photo. Proper documentation (photographer and date of first publication) is required for it to pass {{PD-Philippines}}. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:16, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Looks like a modern painting of which the painter did not yet pass away at least 70 years ago, so probably copyright violation. No painter mentioned, no date of production, no VRT ticket. JopkeB (talk) 10:24, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:17, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 10:28, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:16, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 10:32, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:16, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Redigeerimine (talk · contribs)
[edit]Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope.
mattbr 10:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:17, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighted stock photo, does not appear to be released under a CC licence: https://www.istockphoto.com/vector/law-justice-isometric-composition-gm1201264671-344426292 Lord Belbury (talk) 15:06, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:18, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Personal photo without educational use Drakosh (talk) 15:10, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:17, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Personal photo without educational use Drakosh (talk) 15:10, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:18, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope for Wikimedia Commons Tabercil (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:18, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope. User has been blocked for abusing multiple accounts. Johnj1995 (talk) 17:11, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: INUSE on Wikidata so INSCOPE. --Gbawden (talk) 06:32, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Alex Blokha (talk) 17:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; dup of File:Russian ship, go f yourself. Bright. 2.jpg. --Gbawden (talk) 06:33, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Alex Blokha (talk) 17:13, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:32, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
_(page_6_crop).jpg){kind=link}
_(page_6_crop).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Please delete the redirect so I can use the name to make a new crop of the pdf page Angelgreat (talk) 17:51, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
_(page_6_crop).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:34, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
_(page_6_crop).jpg){kind=link}
Likely not own works: low-res web-sized images with inconsistent or missing EXIF data (File:Terminal outside.jpg is credited to Author RAUL URBINA, Copyright holder AENA). Unreliable uploader, numerous previous DR's.
- File:Terminal outside.jpg
- File:Gran Canaria Internacional Airport.png
- File:Aeropuerto-gran-canaria.jpg
- File:GranCanariaAirport.jpg
P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
It appears on an Argentine website online at least since November 2007 Carnby (talk) 18:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Cover of a magazine. Copyrighted 2001:983:2ED1:1:AD61:4897:E074:5FA9 19:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Published in 1978; cf. COM:France. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- je confirme demander la suppression de cette image 2A01:CB04:A2D:F200:547A:B431:D148:4F3E 21:55, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:30, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Non notable people. Also, previous revisions should be deleted as text was copied from http://enciclopedia.auroradecolchagua.cl/wiki/Manuel_Allendes_Galaz Bedivere (talk) 19:49, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:29, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
português do Brasil Leonardo Arantes é um cantor e compositor brasileiro, Nascido em 23 de Agosto de 1982 na Cidade de Goiânia Goiás. Nome Completo: Leonardo Arantes da Cunha, Nome dos Pais: Maria Jane Ourives Arantes e João Melo da Cunha. 191.126.13.103 20:15, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:33, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Esta é uma imagem teste para uma página a ser criada. Não tem qualquer função prática, e deve ser apagada de imediato. Raphaelkruno (talk) 20:33, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:34, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
No permission. Copirated in sourse https://www.caravan.kz/news/v-seti-poyavilas-aktualnaya-karta-boevykh-dejjstvijj-v-kharkove-820928/ Venzz (talk) 21:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:36, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
duplicate of file:Tuesday in a magnetic MRI face down sort of way - Flickr - TheeErin.jpg Arlo James Barnes 00:06, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- File:Planking on an MRI machine.jpg should be kept. The other one is the duplicate. Schierbecker (talk) 00:21, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Kept - this one is better than the other. --Gbawden (talk) 07:44, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Pastor Martin Peraza en el congreso juvenil soldados de Jesus. 191.126.6.193 01:00, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
- Keep No valid reason. A09090091 (talk) 17:58, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Por que está archivada esta discusión? 191.116.231.253 03:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete unless some in-scope usefulness is shown. Uncategorized since 2011; only upload by user. Middling quality snapshot without any evident compensating importance evident. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 23:31, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; out of scope. --Gbawden (talk) 07:43, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Unused personal photo. Solomon203 (talk) 03:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:42, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
G11 - retired Anibal Maysonet (talk) 03:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:42, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rbsharma1946 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Biography of non-notable individual and, ignoring the (thus out of COM:SCOPE) image, excluded material by the same policy.
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 04:22, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:45, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected. EugeneZelenko (talk) 05:49, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:28, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
drawing without educational use Drakosh (talk) 06:34, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:28, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
No FOP in Iran Rohalamin (talk) 06:35, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:46, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
out of scope, advertisement Bodhisattwa (talk) 06:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:29, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by RAJARAM MAHATO (talk · contribs)
[edit]advertisement, out of scope
Bodhisattwa (talk) 06:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:29, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 08:14, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:38, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic missing evidence of permission. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 08:15, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:38, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 08:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:38, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 08:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:38, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 08:19, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:38, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work. Photo in top left is from Wikimedia Commons - no acknowledgement given. Right hand photo has been bouncing around the internet for some years. Original source unknown but it is not the Uploader. Headlock0225 (talk) 08:19, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:38, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 08:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:27, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 08:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:28, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logos / graphics claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope.
mattbr 08:28, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:27, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Background of what seems to be a website CoffeeEngineer (talk) 09:01, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:27, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Blue square without much use CoffeeEngineer (talk) 09:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:27, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation. The artist, Hélène Bueno, is not yet dead, I do not see a VRT ticket. JopkeB (talk) 11:28, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:25, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Potential copyright violation. Low image resolution and missing EXIF data. Uploader has uploaded copyvio images before. SCP-2000 11:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:25, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gingerfrgys (talk · contribs)
[edit]Paintings of sr:Милица Вучковић, living painter. No permission. Permission should be sent through Commons:Volunteer Response Team.
- File:"Деца света", Афтика и Сирија је далеко.jpg
- File:Фрида Кало.jpg
- File:Мишел Фуко.jpg
- File:"Истрајност".jpg
- File:"Интроспекција".jpg
- File:Достојанство.jpg
- File:"Вечера", инсталација.jpg
- File:"Ручак", уље на платну.jpg
- File:"Доручак", репринт на платну.jpg
Smooth O (talk) 11:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:25, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
COM:TOYS; copyrighted LEGO figure. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:20, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 12:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 12:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Logo for a Russian sports team claimed as 'own work' but missing VRT permission. The threshold of originality is considered to be very low for Russian works, see COM:TOO Russia. Due to the graphic elements, the logo is potentially sufficiently original to qualify for copyright protection in its country of origin. For public domain / copyright ineligible works Wikimedia Commons only accepts media that are in the public domain in at least the United States and in the source country of the work. mattbr 12:52, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Unused low-res that can be replaced with images here Category:Nintendo DSi
Might be a COM:NETCOPYVIO. Seems like a stock/press kit image. See gallery. Ryūkotsusei (talk) 16:25, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Withdraw since the SVG code is valid. Ryūkotsusei (talk) 16:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Withdrawn. --Gbawden (talk) 07:23, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:22, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:No fighting signs
[edit]COM:FOP Canada does not apply to 2D works like signs, and no evidence that this was created even 50 years ago (see COM:CANADA).
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:59, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:22, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Fake image without relevant source and description. Drakosh (talk) 17:03, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Possible copyvio from video which was published 5 months ago (source). --Rave (talk) 13:45, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:22, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from advertisement. Should be cropped/blanked to keep. EugeneZelenko (talk) 17:03, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:22, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Photo with copyright, see https://slub.qucosa.de/nutzungshinweise-fuer-die-digitalen-objekte-in-qucosa/#c66 .A release to commons is needed. Tohma (talk) 17:04, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:22, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Historical logo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected. EugeneZelenko (talk) 17:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:21, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
It has a subtitle- kibrisdoctor.com. Looks like an advertisement. Cinadon36 (talk) 17:07, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:21, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope. User has been blocked for abusing multiple accounts. Johnj1995 (talk) 17:10, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:04, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Logo / graphic claimed as 'own work'. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 13:19, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:27, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Image uses cc-by-nc-sa license and the NC/non-commercial part is incompatible with Commons czar 17:56, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 14:03, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Suspected copyright violation: professional studio photograph. MKFI (talk) 17:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP. --Rosenzweig τ 16:37, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
It's not a free text. A release to commons is needed. Tohma (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep The AP is the copyright holder and responsible for renewing copyright, and they never renewed any copyrights according to the Library of Congress. --RAN (talk) 04:08, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Question@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): Is there a source for this claim that the AP “never renewed any copyrights according to the Library of Congress”? --Rosenzweig τ 16:42, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
- Read Category:Associated Press articles which links to the renewal database. --RAN (talk) 17:40, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
- @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): So there is no source, but this is your own personal conclusion? --Rosenzweig τ 17:52, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
- Read Category:Associated Press articles which links to the renewal database. --RAN (talk) 17:40, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
- Ultimately the registration database and renewal database is the gold standard. Search the database yourself for "AP" and "Associated Press" and read the conclusion of the LOC at their website on searching for renewals for images. The expense would be staggering when you generate thousands of articles and news images a day, a newspaper can register and renew an entire issue. The AP would have to register and renew each individual article and image, a single breaking news story may generate 100 updated versions. --RAN (talk) 17:58, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
- Ah, so there is a statement, thanks. That one should be linked from Category:Associated Press articles. --Rosenzweig τ 18:05, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
- If you are interested in Library of Congress images, each Friday they release 50 at Flickr Commons and ask for help adding context to the images, they are currently in a tranche from 1924. See for example: this image where I created a Wikidata entry for the people in the image and added a public domain obituary and other confirming images at Wikimedia Commons. User: Fae transferred all the images to Wikimedia Commons already, but with no context and all are dated "1900". --RAN (talk) 18:22, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. The text is so short and basic that I think even {{PD-ineligible}} would fit. --Rosenzweig τ 07:17, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
Nori Malo-Renault died in 1953, copyright violation. 2A01:CB00:A05:D100:350B:FABC:E0A1:3BB5 17:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- L'Originale dans les collections du Musée des Beau Arts de Quimper [1] François Malo-Renault (talk) 13:50, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
Category:Nori Malo-Renault Encore un peu de temps et vous ne me verrez plus ; et encore un peu de temps et vous me verrez, car 2023 est proche... A little more time and you will see me no more; and a little more time and you will see me, because 2023 is near... --François Malo-Renault (talk) 08:28, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. The file can be restored in 2024. --Rosenzweig τ 11:40, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
A senseless title that explains nothing ... no place name ... no nothing .... just a useless picture that is not even searchable 2405:201:6806:5065:E148:A16F:9464:8750 12:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep: Categorised and given geopos. --Achim55 (talk) 14:04, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per Achim55. --Rosenzweig τ 10:52, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Redundant to File:Kosifler logo.png. No usage on Wikimedia projects. mattbr 08:25, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 08:27, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Redundant to File:KPIT logo CMYK 300dpi 150212.png. No usage on Wikimedia projects. mattbr 09:33, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 08:26, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Googlemaps CopyVio Enyavar (talk) 12:34, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete The underlying satellite image/map (likely Google Maps) is presumably copyrighted. -M.nelson (talk) 14:00, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, discussion, COM:PRP. --Rosenzweig τ 08:33, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
A map from 1925. As old as it is, we still need a justification as to why the original map is copyright-free. It doesn't fall under {{PD-Poland}} or {{PD-old-assumed}} yet. Botev (talk) 13:29, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP. I'm unable to establish the copyright status of the map (and this file) without a proper source. --Rosenzweig τ 08:29, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Ceci est une ancienne version, la nouvelle numérisation est de meilleur qualité; Voir les fichiers affiliés à Rion des Landes Romacq.40370 (talk) 13:45, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I see other images of this location, but not this exact image, why delete it? --RAN (talk) 17:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Bonjour, j'ai fait un nouveau scan de cette carte postale, la nouvelle est de meilleur qualité dont les couleurs sont plus vives. Je demande la suppression de l'ancienne version pour ne pas surcharger Wikipédia avec des doublons. Romacq.40370 (talk) 19:14, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, the new version is File:Rion le kiosque 1922.jpg. @Romacq.40370: If you make a new scan of the exact same postcard, of which you have already uploaded an earlier scan like in this case, please upload it as a new version of the original scan, using the same file name. Then no deletion request is needed. Thank you.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Photo of mural painting. Already deleted many times. (See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Quebec DSC08605 - La Fresque des Quebecois (36600199450).jpg.) -- Asclepias (talk) 14:11, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete --Wilfredor (talk) 18:41, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete No COM:FOP Canada for 2d works. Permission from the mural artist is needed. -M.nelson (talk) 13:58, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, discussion. --Rosenzweig τ 09:08, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Is AXMicLightCurve.png with wrong filename Hobbema (talk) 15:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, Hobbema is correct. I did not know how to delete this file myself, but it should be deleted.PopePompus (talk) 15:45, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Inaccurate, unused, and redundant with File:AXMicLightCurve.png -M.nelson (talk) 13:53, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and discussion. --Rosenzweig τ 08:34, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
duplicate file Partha protim konar (talk) 08:25, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, see File:Hare Krishna Konar Signature in 1938.png. --Rosenzweig τ 12:14, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
This contains dozens and dozens of company logos, many of which likely are copyrightable. -- ferret (talk) 23:28, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- The logos will of course be trademarked, but when used for purely informational purposes, it is not considered trademark infringement in most jurisictions. I also included a disclaimer in the graph to explicitly clarify that it's not affiliated with any of the companies features (source: https://www.inta.org/fact-sheets/fair-use-of-trademarks-intended-for-a-non-legal-audience/) Snowedover (talk) 00:57, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- Not talking about trademarks. Talking about Copyrights. A whole different ball game for Commons. Commons cannot accept fair use of copyrighted material. Period. -- ferret (talk) 00:59, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, yes agreed Commons is too permissive a license for this, would you be willing to accept this uploaded through the portal for copyrighted material? Snowedover (talk) 01:45, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
- Not talking about trademarks. Talking about Copyrights. A whole different ball game for Commons. Commons cannot accept fair use of copyrighted material. Period. -- ferret (talk) 00:59, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Not sure if this could uploaded as fair use to en.wp, usually these images are required to be quite small. --Rosenzweig τ 12:20, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Файл везде заменён на вектор. Он больше не используется ни одной страницей KittenBroEeev (talk) 12:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Weak delete Unused and redundant with File:Shin-script.svg. I don't see any reason to keep the png. -M.nelson (talk) 14:02, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Kept: we don't delete raster images just because there is now also a vector version available. --Rosenzweig τ 12:55, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
COM:DW from packaging. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:23, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete The 'logo' is a creative work which is presumably copyrighted. -M.nelson (talk) 14:00, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, discussion. --Rosenzweig τ 12:47, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
somebody's painting, unknown copyright, unknown notability Pibwl (talk) 17:34, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP. --Rosenzweig τ 12:57, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Ceci est une ancienne version, la nouvelle numérisation est de meilleur qualité; Voir File:Rion, le château Poisson 1928.jpg Romacq.40370 (talk) 13:46, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
J'ai réalisé un nouveau scan de cette carte postale, voir File:Rion, le château Poisson 1928.jpg , je souhaite le supprimer afin de ne pas surcharger Wikipedia avec des doublons. Romacq.40370 (talk) 18:53, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, new scan is File:Rion, le château Poisson 1928.jpg. --Rosenzweig τ 18:06, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Ceci est une ancienne version, la nouvelle numérisation est de meilleur qualité; Voir les fichiers affiliés à Rion des Landes Romacq.40370 (talk) 13:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I see other images of this location, but not this exact image, why delete it? --RAN (talk) 17:19, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Bonjour, j'ai fait un nouveau scan de cette carte postale, la nouvelle est de meilleur qualité dont les couleurs sont plus vives. Je demande la suppression de l'ancienne version pour ne pas surcharger Wikipédia avec des doublons Romacq.40370 (talk) 19:15, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
J'ai réalisé un nouveau scan de meilleur qualité de cette CPA, voir File:Rion, le lac 1907.jpg . Je souhaite supprimer ce fichier afin de ne pas surcharger Wikipédia avec des doublons. Romacq.40370 (talk) 18:58, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, new scan is File:Rion, le lac 1907.jpg. --Rosenzweig τ 18:04, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
COM:PACKAGING and COM:DW - nothing known about the image, missing essential info of the original author, date, and source (and permission if it is a modern reproduction). P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- I'd say Keep, the portrait is a public domain image also used on the Qianlong Emperor's Wikipedia page and certainly is contemporary. As for this coin, I bought the same package in New York City over a decade ago for $ 10,- and it's 100% (one-hundred percent) fake, but there is a category for fake Qianlong Tongbao cash coins and it fits right into it. The author is Giuseppe Castiglione (1688–1766), 1766 + 70 = 1836 + 1 = 1837. So it became a public domain image in 1837 using the PMA+70 forumla. The latest possible is still during the 19th century for it to be copyrighted. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 15:36, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: The portrait painting is File:乾隆.jpg, PD-old. I don't see anything else that is really copyrightable, just some simple forms, numbers and Chinese characters. --Rosenzweig τ 17:54, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
File:Traffic Sign GR - KOK 2009 - P-65.svg was originally created first, this file is a duplicate Llama jim. Clapped (talk) 11:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Looking at [2] (p. 174), neither of these two is really correct, but this seems to have slightly less errors. --Rosenzweig τ 18:59, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
The file is a video clip from Indian YouTube channel News 360 Tv, in which according to watermark, the entire video is copied from Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). One should also note that RFE/RL works are not under US public domain unlike VOA. As a result, the file is copyrighted by RFE/RL, very likely to be unfree, and the "permission" given by the channel is invalid. 廣九直通車 (talk) 05:47, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 22:11, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
The award of Belarusian non-government association does not match PD-RU-exempt license. The link of source is unavailable. Krylowicz (talk) 20:43, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: with {{PD-ineligible}}. This is just 5 vertical bars in different colors. --Rosenzweig τ 23:41, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
The award of Belarusian non-government association does not match PD-RU-exempt license. The link of source is unavailable. Krylowicz (talk) 20:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
![20:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/02/27#c-Krylowicz-2022-02-27T20:44:00.000Z-File:Лента_медали_"За_Заслуги".jpg){kind=link}
Kept: with {{PD-ineligible}}. This is just 2 vertical bars in different colors. --Rosenzweig τ 23:42, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
![23:42, 5 August 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/02/27#c-Rosenzweig-20220805234200-File:Лента_медали_"За_Заслуги".jpg){kind=link}
The award of Belarusian non-government association does not match PD-RU-exempt license. The link of source is unavailable. Krylowicz (talk) 20:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: with {{PD-ineligible}}. This is just 5 vertical bars in different colors. --Rosenzweig τ 23:41, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
Недостоверные сведения об авторе и дате снимка: годы жизни 1960-2020, фото никак не могло быть сделано в 2022 году -- Tomasina (talk) 10:15, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Томасина! Там под фотопортретом есть даже подпись: Владимир Штокман (1998) Smolineczka (talk) 10:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Smolineczka, Вы - Владимир Штокман и фотографировали сами себя? Вы написали, что являетесь автором, при чём здесь подпись Штокмана? -- Tomasina (talk) 12:09, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
- задайте пожалуйста вопрос, на который хотите знать ответ Smolineczka (talk) 13:22, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP. Reading through this and User talk:Smolineczka (with translators), I have significant doubt that a) the uploader understands how copyright works b) this is "own work". --Rosenzweig τ 17:17, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Without a description, this is a troll. This ham was cut, poorly re-wrapped and stored improperly, and left to rot. And then presented here for shock value. It's not constructive.Sqwertz (talk) 14:27, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Agree, not a constructive image. It shows an improperly stored, spoiled food item. Netherzone (talk) 15:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- No problem with deleting, as uploader. I found it on Flickr 11 years ago when there were few or no free images of Smithfield hams to be found. There are much better images on Commons now. "Kill away, Mr. McManus." - The Usual Suspects, Mr. Kobayashi. Geoff Who, me? 16:37, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Its the only picture I can find in Commons that illustrate rotten meat, unless someone can show otherwise. howdy.carabao 🌱🐃🌱 (talk) 02:10, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. The solutions to the problems described would be amending the description, possibly renaming the file, replacing or annotating inappropriate usage in the projects, etc. --Rosenzweig τ 16:55, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
На снимке есть два копирайта - программы Сегодня и телеканала НТВ. MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 15:05, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete or blur/crop logos - the logo and program name exceed the extremely low COM:TOO Russia. -M.nelson (talk) 13:56, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
Kept: uploaded a new version cropped to not show the logos, then hid the first version. --Rosenzweig τ 16:37, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Per COM:CUR Nigeria Ox1997cow (talk) 16:14, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. You can barely see some of the coins, the youngest ones I can recognize are Kobo coins that were issued in 1973; later re-issues using different metals had the same designs. The medallist for those was apparently Englishman Geoffrey Colley (born 1934), who probably died over the last few years; his website geoffcolley.com is offline. Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Nigeria, these coins are most likely "made by or under the direction or control of the Government, a State authority or prescribed international body" and protected for 70 years after publication, so the coin designs are free in Nigeria in 2044 and 2069 in the US (because of the URAA, {{PD-US-GovEdict}} unfortunately does not seem to apply to coins). --Rosenzweig τ 16:28, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
copyright violation. HRadmin (talk) 17:24, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Psy0819, the uploader, does not have a permission to use this file.
- Although now deleted on the blog, this file was made public by Ho-Jin Yoo in 2014.
- Ho-jin Yoo did not permit commercial use of this logo.
- Psy0819 clearly violates copyright. HRadmin (talk) 23:59, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: this would most likely be below COM:TOO South Korea, but as an apparently very obscure logo I don't think it's in project scope. --Rosenzweig τ 17:21, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept now with {{PD-textlogo}} as it is apparently a logo associated with ko:헌터리아, a notable musician. --Rosenzweig τ 17:38, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
Misleading picture of another person - the real w:pl:Zbigniew Jurkiewicz can be seen here: https://www.halogorlice.info/wiadomosci/23256,zmarl-zbigniew-jurkiewicz There is claim that the picture shows another person who is alive. Zbigniew Jurkiewicz died recently. Polimerek (talk) 12:56, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no reason for deletion. According to LinkedIN, there are 5 persons with this name, so perhaps many more. Image is used on two user pages of uploader on pl Wikipedia. I cannot asses the value of these pages or if this person is within scope of Commons. --Ellywa (talk) 22:36, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
Possibly not own work, but this poster (including all artworks) by Hans Schweitzer (d. 1980) are still copyrighted. ZmeytheDragon16 (talk) 07:51, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
- The Deutsche Digitale Bibliothek, a reputable organization run by the German government, states that it is available under a CC-BY-SA 3.0 license, as it says clearly in the image description [3], apparently released as such by the Staatsarchiv Freiburg. Own work is not claimed. This is no different than the many Bundesarchiv images which have a known creator. Buidhe (talk) 18:49, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per User:Buidhe. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:11, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
This is a work by Hans Schweitzer aka Mjölnir and still protected by copyright until the end of 2050. This poster (or one copy of it) is apparently part of a poster collection of the state archive at Freiburg, which digitized that whole collection in 2006 for preservation purposes. If you go to the entry for the poster at https://www.landesarchiv-bw.de/plink/?f=5-196945-1, you will see that there is no image online there. Apparently the digitized posters were accessible online some time ago, and because of a blanket CC license they have for their online collections found its way to the Deutsche Digitale Bibliothek (which simply automatically harvested other websites) because of this.
That the state archive has since removed the posters says they made a mistake and have corrected it. I also don't see how a regional state archive in the Southwest of Germany could hold the necessary copyrights for the works of this well-known Nazi propaganda artist, as they would need to in order to put that image under a CC license. The major difference to the Bundesarchiv images that were mentioned is a) that it is far more plausible that the German federal archive holds rights to certain military propaganda images (and others) and b) that those images that were uploaded here by an agreement were explicitly said to be put under a free license, while here there's only some blanket clause, making it necessary to also apply some plausibility criteria if some work is not specifically mentioned as being put under a free license.
tl;dr: This image is not under a free license, there was a mistake. It is still protected by copyright and should be deleted. The file can be restored in 2051. Rosenzweig τ 15:11, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- It's not possibly under copyright. The work is commissioned by Nazi Government of The Third Reich which doesn't exist anymore and the Federal Republic of Germany founded after WW2 is not a successor but a completely new state.--Comrade-yutyo (talk) 10:42, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- What does that have to do with copyright? That it was possibly commissioned by the state does not mean that the state owns the copyright or that it expired or whatever you are trying to imply. That's not how German Urheberrecht (copyright law) works. --Rosenzweig τ 13:30, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellywa (talk) 22:38, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
photo of 1984-85 season, it cannot be licensed under the PD-Italy licence (pre-1976) — danyele 02:02, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:26, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation from [4]. The badge of Ministry of Information of the Republic of Belarus is not belong to state awards according to {{PD-BY-exempt}} Krylowicz (talk) 17:48, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:28, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
The award of Belarusian non-government association does not match PD-RU-exempt license. The link of source is unavailable. Krylowicz (talk) 17:57, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:29, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
The award of Belarusian non-government association does not match PD-RU-exempt license. The link of source is unavailable. Krylowicz (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:30, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
The award of Belarusian non-government association does not match PD-RU-exempt license. The link of source is unavailable. Krylowicz (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:31, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
The award of Belarusian non-government association does not match PD-RU-exempt license. The link of source is unavailable. Krylowicz (talk) 17:59, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
![17:59, 27 February 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/02/27#c-Krylowicz-2022-02-27T17:59:00.000Z-File:Орден_"Верность_и_Вера"_второй_степени.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:32, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
![20:32, 9 August 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/02/27#c-Well-Informed_Optimist-20220809203200-File:Орден_"Верность_и_Вера"_второй_степени.jpg){kind=link}
It's not a free text. A release to commons is needed. Tohma (talk) 11:10, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Reuters did not renew copyrights for articles published in the United States, I can't find any news service that did, since they don't actually publish anything themselves and distribute up to a thousand articles a day to over a hundred countries, each article update multiple times, I am not even sure how a renewal would work for a news agency. --RAN (talk) 04:15, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. NYT copyrighted this article of Reuters, it is assumed the newspaper created a new copyright. Per http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/cce/firstperiod.html#N nyt renewed all their copyrights. Therefore this image must be deleted. If you do not agree with my decision to delete the file, please ask for undeletion on COM:UNDELETE. If you do so, formulate your motivation why this image can be maintained very clearly and base your motivation on the Commons policies. After that, another administrator will take a decision. --Ellywa (talk) 06:44, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
source not retrieveavable, unknown author of performance, unknown year. Source does not list this piece (anymore). Today's URL: http://www.el-atril.com/midis/Beethoven.htm Mateus2019 (talk) 19:26, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. The source does not show a free lincence. --Ellywa (talk) 14:36, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
no valid source, no naming of performer, no year, licence stated here is out of nowhere Mateus2019 (talk) 20:42, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. it is not shown the midi file has a free licence per COM:EVID. --Ellywa (talk) 14:38, 10 August 2022 (UTC)