Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2022/04/17
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
Copyrighted image. Flickrwashed. DrKay (talk) 15:10, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as req by uploader. --Túrelio (talk) 10:01, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio. Dronebogus (talk) 04:26, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio - speedy. --Herby talk thyme 11:24, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/insource:"Light Rail Pokemon("
[edit]Per COM:TOYS. Images of toys depicting characters from the Pokemon franchise. Also, the extreme HDR would indicate that they are fairly unusable per COM:EDUSE.
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (1) (8436755810).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (3) (8436755476).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (22) (8436753074).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (24) (8436752744).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (32) (8435667491).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (13) (8435669953).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (34) (8436751732).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (29) (8436752126).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (35) (8436751714).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (28) (8435667911).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (26) (8435668193).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (9) (8436754924).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (5) (8435667071).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (2) (8436755602).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (7) (8435670827).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (16) (8436753862).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (18) (8436753634).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (25) (8436752638).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (6) (8436755174).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (20) (8435668957).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (11) (8436754588).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (8) (8435670695).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (19) (8436753480).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (4) (8436755382).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (37) (8436751052).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (23) (8435668529).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (27) (8436752434).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (10) (8435670449).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (21) (8436753198).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (12) (8436754398).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (14) (8436754118).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (30) (8435667573).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (31) (8435666821).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (33) (8435666701).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (36) (8436751554).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (15) (8435669795).jpg
- File:Light Rail Pokemon (17) (8435669385).jpg
BriefEdits (talk) 02:02, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:06, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
unfree image, probably taken from https://thepointsguy.com/reviews/aeromexico-787-9-business-class/ © 2022 THE POINTS GUY, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. A RED VENTURES COMPANY. Mateus2019 (talk) 02:36, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Delete Appears to be a clear copyright violation. For context, the uploader was warned about copyright violations in a draft article they were preparing at English Wikipedia. From Hill To Shore (talk) 14:43, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:03, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Freedom of panorama violation Ceahjlazco1882 (talk) 04:56, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Keep COM:FOP Denmark includes building. --A1Cafel (talk) 07:10, 17 April 2022 (UTC)- Keep According to en:Listed buildings in Middelfart Municipality, the building dates from 1600 at the latest, so it's well out of copyright. --bjh21 (talk) 13:26, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Compliant with Denmark FOP and building too old for copyright anyway. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:10, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Not an official flag. Also, this SVG flag has poor quality. 182.2.132.228 07:00, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep: The file is in use on multiple Wikipedias, so under COM:NPOV it shouldn't be deleted for being inaccurate. On the other hand, the 2016 overwriting with a version with a coat of arms doesn't look like the kind of thing allowed by COM:OVERWRITE, so maybe reversion to the original version would be merited. --bjh21 (talk) 13:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep: and revert to the first version. --jed (talk) 05:41, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Comment I have now reverted the file to its original (2007) version on the basis that the 2016 version, which added a coat of arms, was not a minor improvement as permitted by COM:OVERWRITE. If anyone believes that the version with the coat of arms is correct, they should upload it under a different name and then set about convincing the various Wikipedias to change which version they use. --bjh21 (talk) 09:27, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:12, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Andyshinyi (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal images outside our scope. Commons is not a web hosting platform
- File:Family 15.jpg
- File:Family 14.jpg
- File:Family 16.jpg
- File:Family 19.jpg
- File:Family 18.jpg
- File:Family 10.jpg
- File:FATMEWTUTA-0059.jpg
- File:Andy pogi-0016.jpg
- File:Andy pogi-0015.jpg
- File:Andy pogi-0013.jpg
- File:Family 11.gif
- File:Family 9.gif
- File:Family 8.jpg
- File:At homee.jpg
- File:At home.png
- File:At homeee.jpg
Herby talk thyme 07:08, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 07:12, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Personal photo without educaional use Drakosh (talk) 07:41, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:16, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
This photograph is by Cecil Beaton (died 1980).[1][2][3] Dutch Archives don't have the right to release it into the public domain as they are not the owner. DrKay (talk) 13:44, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete photo of photo. Multichill (talk) 17:44, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:20, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
{{FoP-Taiwan}} doesn't apply to indoor artworks. 沈澄心✉ 13:50, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:21, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by مدحت عبد الرازق (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal photo for non-Wikipedian. Out of scope
--Alaa :)..! 15:44, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:23, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Not an original work. The file was lifted from www.epokaere.com. There is no evidence the image is PD. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 17:34, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:24, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Not an original work. The image was lifted from a Euronews article linked in the file summary. There is no evidence the image is PD. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 17:36, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:24, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
1980s newspaper clipping, text is not CC licenced nor any equivalent free licence. Lord Belbury (talk) 18:27, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:26, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
no exif, small resolution, new user, single purpose account, unused, strange cats, small filesize, poor naming, small desription, probably out of scope, probably COPYVIO
- File:McLaren 540c and whore.jpg
- File:Sexy Japanese whore and McLaren 540C.jpg <-- file has not been deleted yet, but moved without leaving a redirect.
C.Suthorn (talk) 18:44, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:27, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Douptful - Gertraud was already dead on the date of the image Bahnmoeller (talk) 21:45, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:28, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
the artist Gertraud Hamburger died 12. April 2020 - so still under copyright Bahnmoeller (talk) 21:47, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:28, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
the artist Gertraud Hamburger died 12. April 2020 - so still under copyright Bahnmoeller (talk) 21:48, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:28, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
the artist Gertraud Hamburger died 12. April 2020 - so still under copyright Bahnmoeller (talk) 21:48, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:29, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
the artist Gertraud Hamburger died 12. April 2020 - so still under copyright Bahnmoeller (talk) 21:49, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:29, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
the artist Gertraud Hamburger died 12. April 2020 - so still under copyright Bahnmoeller (talk) 21:49, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:29, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
the artist Gertraud Hamburger died 12. April 2020 - so still under copyright Bahnmoeller (talk) 21:50, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:29, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation, original image e.g. at https://beta.blickpunktfilm.de/details/448710 178.1.43.164 22:25, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:29, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Websized image unlikely to be "own work", as licensed. Credited to the corporation here and available elsewhere on the Internet in higher resolution. czar 02:45, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete The website linked above has the photo in April 2016 but our upload here was in August 2016. The uploader appears to be a single purpose account to promote the corporation, so may hold the copyright. However, as we were not the first site of publication, we would need to see evidence of permission for the free licence. From Hill To Shore (talk) 14:55, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: unlikely own work. --Strakhov (talk) 18:35, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
non-free album cover Викиенот (talk) 03:15, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Strakhov (talk) 18:36, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Nondescript, no educational value 62.216.210.62 08:06, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. File currently in use. IronGargoyle (talk) 07:17, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per IronGargoyle. --Strakhov (talk) 18:40, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
because of mistaken upload ANITA POCS (talk) 09:22, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted. --Strakhov (talk) 18:42, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
does not link with "nebulae" , religious propaganda 2A01:CB08:900E:3700:89C:F6D:5650:9758 10:50, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. The caption and file name can be changed if inappropriate. The file is currently in use on two pages of Wikiquote. IronGargoyle (talk) 13:28, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, IronGargoyle. --Strakhov (talk) 18:43, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
GoogleMaps CopyVio Enyavar (talk) 12:47, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, not own work. --Strakhov (talk) 18:44, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Lo sentimos, esta imagen no es interesante para una enciclopedia Tae-Hwa Josue (talk) 13:54, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Weak delete as a courtesy to the uploader/nominator. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Strakhov (talk) 18:46, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
duplicate of svg Antemister (talk) 15:41, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Kept: In use Natuur12 (talk) 11:34, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
duplicate of File:Flag of Cameroon.svg, no usage. Ceahjlazco1882 (talk) 14:02, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - It's not an exact duplicate. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 13:29, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: not a duplicate. --Strakhov (talk) 18:47, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Both images in the file history have been previously published elsewhere on the web (e.g. [4],[5][6]); no evidence that the uploader is the photographer as claimed. HaeB (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, unlikely own work. --Strakhov (talk) 18:49, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Walter Schnackenberg
[edit]Walter Schnackenberg died in 1961, so his works are still copyrighted in Germany until the end of 2031.
- File:Bolshewismus bringt Krieg, Arbeitslosigkeit und Hungersnot. Vereinigung zur Bekämpfung des Bolshewismus - Schnackenberg, Dez. 18. LCCN2004666101.jpg
- File:Bolshewismus bringt Krieg, Arbeitslosigkeit und Hungersnot. Vereinigung zur Bekämpfung des Bolshewismus - Schnackenberg, Dez. 18. LCCN2004666101.tif
- File:Bolshewismus bringt Krieg, Arbeitslosigkeit und Hungersnot. Vereinigung zur Bekämpfung des Bolshewismus - Schnackenberg, Dez. 18. LCCN2004666150.tif
- File:Bolshewismus bringt Krieg, Arbeitslosigkeit und Hungersnot. Vereinigung zur Bekämpfung des Bolshewismus LCCN2004666150.jpg
- File:German anti-communist poster 1918.jpg
De728631 (talk) 22:22, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Undelete in 2032. Abzeronow (talk) 23:09, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 08:15, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Walter Schnackenberg
[edit]These are works of German painter and illustrator de:Walter Schnackenberg, who died in 1961. They are therefore still protected by copyright and should be deleted. The files can be restored in 2032.
- File:SCHNACKENBERG, Walter. Fasching, Simplicissimus magazine, 1912.jpg
- File:SCHNACKENBERG, Walter. Zeichnung zum Gedicht, Russisches Ballett, Simplicissimus magazine, 1912.jpg
Rosenzweig τ 17:47, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, undelete in 2032. --Strakhov (talk) 18:51, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Introductionsareforlosers (talk · contribs)
[edit]out of project scope
Didym (talk) 22:00, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Strakhov (talk) 18:53, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
All other images from this user are copyright violations, so this probably as well. 178.1.43.164 22:26, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Strakhov (talk) 18:54, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
All other images from this user are copyright violations, so this probably as well. 178.1.43.164 22:27, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Strakhov (talk) 18:54, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
All other images from this user are copyright violations, so this probably as well. 178.1.43.164 22:28, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Strakhov (talk) 18:54, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Better version: File:Building for rent on Minzu Road Hsinchu City.jpg Solomon203 (talk) 04:03, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Both files are freely licensed. As they are not identical (the EXIF time stamp says they were taken a few seconds apart), there is no reason to delete either one. In fact, the "better" version the nominator has chosen includes some form of artifact in the bottom right of the image (possible light reflection or motion blur). From Hill To Shore (talk) 16:23, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Not identical, case not made for replacement being unambiguously superior. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:52, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
The photo itself may or may not be licensed properly by the source website, but there must be the evidence that the original image is free of copyright. Xunks (talk) 06:06, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:53, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Non-free poster, no Freedom of panorama in Estonia. Xunks (talk) 06:09, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:53, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work, no Freedom of panorama in Estonia. Xunks (talk) 06:12, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:54, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Derivative, no FOP in Lithuania. Xunks (talk) 06:17, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:54, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Derivative, COM:PACKAGING Xunks (talk) 06:18, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:54, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Derivative, COM:PACKAGING. Xunks (talk) 06:21, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:55, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Non-free mural, no FoP in Estonia. Xunks (talk) 06:30, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:56, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Derivative of the non-free billboard, no FoP in Estonia. Xunks (talk) 06:32, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:56, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Derivative, COM:PACKAGING. Xunks (talk) 06:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:57, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Derivative, COM:PACKAGING. Xunks (talk) 06:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:57, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Derivatives of non-free posters, no FoP in Estonia. Xunks (talk) 06:34, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:58, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Non-free mural, no FoP in Estonia. Xunks (talk) 06:38, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:58, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Derivative, COM:PACKAGING. Xunks (talk) 06:39, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:59, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Blurry and unused image, likely out of scope 182.239.88.199 07:03, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 23:59, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
This map can be still copyrighted. Matlin (talk) 11:58, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in Romania. Taivo (talk) 22:57, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
Likely a reupload by Matlin (talk · contribs). If this is the same image, then this must be Delete as a copyrighted map in a country that does not grant commercial freedom of panorama for free uses of public art without artists' or architects' licensing permissions. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:00, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Blurry and unused image, likely out of scope 182.239.88.199 07:06, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep The image is meant to represent the concept of blurring. By definition, it has to be out of focus. It is in scope as having an educational value on topics of vision, motion and focus. From Hill To Shore (talk) 16:36, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Per From Hill To Shore. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:01, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Not what the title supposed, just a selfie of the uploader. -- Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 07:21, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:02, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Totally blurry unusable Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:28, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Appears to be 1 of only 9 images we have of stored specimens of this species in Category:Hemaris thysbe specimens. There are some additional illustrations and images of living examples of this species in related categories. However, this seems to be the only image we have that shows the species from this particular angle. Despite being blurry, it serves as a useful reference until a higher quality replacement becomes available. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:30, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Per From Hill To Shore. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:02, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Very bad quality, unidetified location, useless for Wiki Екатерина Борисова (talk) 08:39, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:05, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Недостоверные сведения об авторе и времени фото: объект умер в 2021 году в возрасте 82 года. -- Tomasina (talk) 09:20, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- This is my photo from the family archive. In the photo, my grandfather, about whom the article was written. SharpJester (talk) 09:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by User:Yann. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:06, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Not in Wikimedia Commons project scope. 182.2.132.228 11:45, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:06, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Busman1234 (talk · contribs)
[edit]File:Plan 2021-2022.pdf has a copyright notice at the bottom ("© tcar"), the other looks similar and has the same logos at the top. If these are taken from a website they need evidence of permission that they're released under a CC licence, and should be credited to the creator.
Lord Belbury (talk) 11:55, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:07, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighted as it is a COM:DERIVATIVE of another video. Sahaib (talk) 12:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 21:58, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Photo of copyrighted book covers. 沈澄心✉ 13:43, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 21:56, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Too complex to be under TOO. 沈澄心✉ 14:07, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:08, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Hulged as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: F10. Seems to be in use by a draft. DaB. (talk) 20:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: No longer in use, CSD F10. --IronGargoyle (talk) 21:42, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Deppty as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: F10. Seems to be in use by a draft. DaB. (talk) 20:06, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: No longer in use. CSD F10. --IronGargoyle (talk) 21:42, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in France. 178.1.43.164 22:58, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 21:43, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in France. 178.1.43.164 22:58, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 21:44, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in France. 178.1.43.164 22:58, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 21:44, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
I have uploaded new version TalkToTriZi (talk) 22:59, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of COM:SCOPE. --IronGargoyle (talk) 21:45, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by BipinBudhathoki1 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal files with no educational use
- File:Bipin Budhathoki 05.jpg
- File:Bipin Budhathoki 05 5.jpg
- File:Bipin Budhathoki 04.jpg
- File:Bipin Budhathoki 02.jpg
- File:Bipin Budhathoki 03.jpg
- File:Bipin Budhathoki 01.jpg
- File:BipinBudhathoki05.jpg
- File:BipinBudhathoki06.jpg
- File:BipinBudhathoki04.jpg
- File:Bipin01.jpg
- File:BipinBudhathoki02.jpg
BRP ever 01:34, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:48, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Pakhopsionic (talk · contribs)
[edit]Works by living artist, missing permission, needs COM:VRT.
- File:Serge Lemonde - Le crocodile, 1993, 122 x 152cm, Musée du Bas-Saint-Laurent.jpg
- File:Serge Lemonde - Kamikaze, 1967, Acrylique sur panneau, 122 x 122cm.jpg
- File:L'hippopotame, 1977, Acrylique sur panneau, 114cm x 114cm, Musée d'art contemporain de Montréal.jpg
- File:Serge Lemonde - Le moteur - Nature morte en clair-obscur, 2016.jpg
P 1 9 9 ✉ 03:30, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, i know personally the artist Serge Lemonde. And Lemonde gave me the permission to put these pictures of his own online. But we didn't knew that Lemonde would have to give the full free rights to anyone. So we will delete the pictures for sure.
- Regards,
- Pakho Psionic Pakhopsionic (talk) 04:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:50, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
made a Wikipedia page about a friend years ago wothout his permission he has asked me to delete it because he is currently tring to find employment — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ace231 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:55, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Overexposed low-res, nondescript. Unusable 62.216.210.62 09:10, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. It's not that bad. I could see this image being used in an article about the area. Light and contrast elements of the image could also be edited if warranted. IronGargoyle (talk) 22:02, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:56, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Ne ho caricato una copia migliorata Ivan Mosso (talk) 11:44, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
- Google translation from Italian to English: I uploaded an improved copy. From Hill To Shore (talk) 15:29, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete This is a scan of an unidentified newspaper. The copyright details are given for the scan, claimed as own work, rather than the original publication. There is no evidence that the original is out of copyright. This problem will also apply to the reupload. From Hill To Shore (talk) 15:29, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 00:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Ne ho caricato una copia migliorata Ivan Mosso (talk) 03:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC) Ivan Mosso (talk) 03:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 00:33, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Unidentifiable and unused personal pic, out of project scope. Fl.schmitt (talk) 16:17, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 00:37, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Medlasfar100 (talk · contribs)
[edit]COM:SCREENSHOTs of junk mail, text is not licenced, photo of keys in the second file is likely a copyrighted stock image.
Lord Belbury (talk) 12:49, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 11:31, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Marmoladaa (talk · contribs)
[edit]Non-free logo. Attempt to insert a picture on the basis of fair use. False licence: uploader is not copyright holder.
- File:NSZZRI Solidarnosc Logo.png
- File:Radio ZET Logo.png
- File:PR Wroclaw Logo.png
- File:PR Chopin Logo.png
- File:PR Dwójka Logo.png
- File:PR Jedynka Logo.jpg
- File:ZNP Logo.png
- File:FZZ LOGO.jpg
- File:NSZZ Solidarnosc.png
- File:Inea SA Logo.png
- File:CyfrowyPolsat SA Logo.png
- File:UPC PL LOGO.png
- File:Tauron PE SA Logo.png
- File:Logo enea.png
- File:Logo PKNOrlenSA.png
- File:Strana Zelenych Slovenska.png
- File:Europa Plus Twoj Ruch.png
- File:Logo heyah.png
- File:PR Logo.jpg
- File:SDPL-logo.png
- File:Porozumienie Centrum.png
- File:Solidarna Polska Logo.png
WTM (talk) 19:21, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 11:36, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:St. Martin (Idstein)
[edit]These windows are works of Paul Corazolla, who died in 2018, and are still protected until the end of 2088. There is no FOP inside buildings in Germany. The files can be restored in 2089.
- File:Katholische Kirche Idstein 013.JPG
- File:St. Martin Idstein, Station IV.jpg
- File:St. Martin, Idstein, Station I.jpg
- File:St. Martin, Idstein, Station VI.jpg
Rosenzweig τ 21:20, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 14:29, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Work is copyright of M. C. Escher (d. 1972), will probably be PD in 2053, until then is a copyvio Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:54, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- If my understanding is correct, you are wrong. Automatic artist copyright began with artworks beginning in 1976, and this work far predates that. The work has not been claimed or copyrighted by the estate of Escher either, which I confirmed by checking here, and which I encourage you to check yourself.
- https://www.copyright.gov/public-records/
- Furthermore, even if the work WAS copyrighted, its public availability and the fact that in this use case it is not being used to generate income for someone other than the original artist, is covered under Fair Use.
- Here is a link to more about copyright law, which is frankly irrelevant to this work which has not been copyrighted.
- https://www.copyright.gov/title17/ Afw35 (talk) 17:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Since Escher was a Dutch artist, we're talking about Dutch copyright here; US copyright is only secondary in this case. The file can be restored in 2043 (70 years pma). --Rosenzweig τ 14:27, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
bad license, there is no real source given for this painting ("own work"), in fact, the creator ist Portrait By K. Cox which is stated here https://www.angelfire.com/art/SomethingPositive/Cheryl.html -- this could be also the source of the image Mateus2019 (talk) 17:16, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 12:00, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighted photo incorrectly described as being under a CC license, which it is not. The source has an image page that makes clear their photos are copyrighted and not available under an acceptable license. Parsecboy (talk) 21:21, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 12:02, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Unused image of non-notable person, out of scope. And scan of historic photo, missing essential info:original author, date, source, and permission. P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:56, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Appears to be an image of a soldier in the Philippines in 1941, which would likely make him, en:Reynaldo Mendoza. Assuming it is the same person, he appears to be notable. I have no information on the copyright situation at the moment. From Hill To Shore (talk) 15:09, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yes this would be tagged soon at Reynaldo Mendoza's wiki page, I am working with the author, which is my cousin. This belongs as part of our family photo collection, photo taken using Reynaldo Mendoza's old film camera by one of his teammates. It is a scan from an old 35mm Kodachrome photo slide. KaaatM (talk) 16:34, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, needs OTRS from Mendoza's family. --Gbawden (talk) 12:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
The photo itself may or may not be licensed properly by the source website, but there must be the evidence that the original image is free of copyright. Xunks (talk) 06:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Unusable, grainy. 62.216.210.62 08:12, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Appears notable, only image we have of him. --Gbawden (talk) 12:00, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:NortesurMAPAMIO.jpg 62.216.210.62 08:16, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:58, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio unless OTRS ticket is provided. 62.216.210.62 08:20, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; likely G10. --Gbawden (talk) 11:58, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Original size version:
- File:Grand Hotel Taipei and Central Broadcasting System 20040809a.jpg
- File:Grand Hotel Taipei and Central Broadcasting System 20040809b.jpg --Solomon203 (talk) 10:34, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Processed as a duplicate. --Gbawden (talk) 11:57, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Possibly out of scope of Wikimedia Commons policy. 182.2.132.228 11:44, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Actually this does seem useful. It would probably be a good inclusion on a page about memes, or country balls, or reactions to Thatcher's death, and so on. Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 20:58, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 11:53, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Grave of a non notable person, araz yakup's pr activities as usual Kadı Message 12:07, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. scope?. --Gbawden (talk) 12:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
duplicate from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Audrey_Leprince_01.jpg AwkwardChester (talk) 12:55, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploaded by 2 different users, taken from https://www.thegamebakers.com/press/ - own work of neither. --Gbawden (talk) 11:53, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
commercial promote image minhhuy (talk) 13:03, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:49, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
commercial promote image minhhuy (talk) 13:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:49, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
commercial promote image minhhuy (talk) 13:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:49, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
commercial promote image minhhuy (talk) 13:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:52, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Rotated duplicates of Geograph images
[edit]- File:Milepost at Duddleswell, Sussex (geograph 2381940).jpg
- File:Milestone at Richmond, Surrey (geograph 2037122).jpg
- File:Leeds & Liverpool Canal milepost (geograph 1340575).jpg
- File:Milepost in Bickerton (geograph 304200).jpg
These files are identical to files we already have on Commons, except that they're in different orientations. They're of no educational use in their rotated form, and turning them the right way around would make them into duplicates, so they should be deleted. Specifically:
- File:Milepost at Duddleswell, Sussex (geograph 2381940).jpg is a rotated version of File:Milepost at Duddleswell, Sussex - geograph.org.uk - 2381940.jpg
- File:Milestone at Richmond, Surrey (geograph 2037122).jpg is a rotated version of File:Milestone at Richmond, Surrey - geograph.org.uk - 2037122.jpg
- File:Leeds & Liverpool Canal milepost (geograph 1340575).jpg is a rotated version of File:Leeds and Liverpool Canal milepost - geograph.org.uk - 1340575.jpg
- File:Milepost in Bickerton (geograph 304200).jpg is a rotated version of File:Milepost in Bickerton - geograph.org.uk - 304200.jpg
--bjh21 (talk) 13:16, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
I have added two more files to the list above. --bjh21 (talk) 15:21, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Lo sentimos, esta imagen no es interesante para una enciclopedia Tae-Hwa Josue (talk) 13:52, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Weak delete as a courtesy to the uploader/nominator. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:34, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Not as courtesy to the uploader, but because there are derivative work issues by including that costume. IronGargoyle (talk) 21:54, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:49, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Educational value is not shown. Taivo (talk) 17:56, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and likely copyvio. --Gbawden (talk) 11:48, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Hulged as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: F10, but it seems to be in use. DaB. (talk) 19:53, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: INUSE on a user page is not enough to keep. --Gbawden (talk) 11:47, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
photographie d'un tableau d'un artiste toujours vivant : copyvio Olivier Tanguy (talk) 20:11, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:47, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Personal Name of the Author 64.44.87.136 20:27, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 11:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
File:*+* Photographic documentation on sexual education - Transgender on the way to women - - Last ejaculations in the condom.jpg
[edit]Bad photo of a condom, nothing we don’t already have Dronebogus (talk) 21:18, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
File:*+* Medicine in the Third Millennium of Humanity - Photography must also go this way - Doctoral Certificate as Doctor of Medicine - Workshop Art Photography and Modern Photo Design - Courage for New Ways.jpg
[edit]Unidentifiable subject and incomprehensible title Dronebogus (talk) 21:19, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete No clue what is going on here Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 21:13, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
- From context I can infer it’s related to medicine, depicts a flag/emblem, and is something trademarked. Which is both very vague and very specific at the same time. Dronebogus (talk) 07:13, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; scope?. --Gbawden (talk) 11:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
File:+ Photographic accompaniment + documentation of a transgender on the way to a woman – Sudden short ejaculation in pants before the CSD 2021 in Berlin – Image 001.jpg
[edit]Not educationally useful, COM:PORN Dronebogus (talk) 21:21, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:40, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Copy of non free media, wrongfully republished as CC-BY-SA (see en:File:Club Brugge KV logo.svg) Hiro (talk) 22:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:37, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Copyright infringement (see https://www.clubbrugge.be/nl/algemene-voorwaarden) Hiro (talk) 22:06, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:36, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
No permission احمد سامي (talk) 23:31, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
No permission احمد سامي (talk) 23:32, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
No permission احمد سامي (talk) 23:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
uploader request 2001:9E8:62C8:C800:70D1:DB1C:6E30:57D1 00:54, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep File has a valid licence, has been present on Wikimedia for 12 years and is in use by two Wikimedia sites. Even if the IP is the original uploader, a deletion request from the uploader is usually honoured for a short period after upload, to allow for mistaken uploads. 12 years before regretting an upload is far too long to be considered. Even if the file was not used, we need to preserve the licence record for any off-site/offline users of the file. From Hill To Shore (talk) 14:26, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per User:From Hill To Shore. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:39, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Buckham died in 1956, so Life+70 would imply that this shouldn't be out of copyright until 2027. I'm not quite sure how we're justifying anything else. Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:28, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Per Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Edinburgh from the air, 1920.jpg. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:30, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing any real argument for it being out of copyright, just a hope it might be under Crown copyright, without any particular reason to think this. The very museum site it's from gives its copyright to Buckham's heirs, and the claimed copyright status on the file page treats it as if it was a US work, which it is not. It needs to be out of copyright in Britain and America to be hosted on Commons, and I'm seeing no evidence for thae former. Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:34, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- It's pathetic for a 102-year-old photo to be copyrighted, but that's the way it is. But it's still just abjectly pathetic. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:06, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- Agreed. Although, to be fair, despite the date given to it, the actual museum says "about 1920", which isn't quite the same. But I'm not sure "It's only 99 years old" would make this better. Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:04, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- It's pathetic for a 102-year-old photo to be copyrighted, but that's the way it is. But it's still just abjectly pathetic. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:06, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. The museum the image is drawn from claims it's copyrighted to Buckham's heirs, Buckham died at a time where the photo would clearly still be protected by copyright in the UK (where the photo was undeniably taken, given the subject matter), and no evidence has been presented that this is actually under Crown Copyright rather than that of his heirs. Unless some sort of evidence can be presented that shows that this photo actually is Crown Copyright, or that the museum's attribution is in error, there's no scenario where this is public domain in the UK. It may be pathetic that a 102-year-old photo is copyrighted, but that's going to be fairly common in a Life+70 copyright regime like we're dealing with here (let alone in a Life+100 regime like Mexico has become). JSarek (talk) 21:46, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Let's face it: there's zero evidence that this would be considered PD in its source country at the moment. I think we can all agree that this is kind of stupid, but those are the rules. Let's just put it away for a couple of years and add it to Category:Undelete in 2027. --El Grafo (talk) 08:24, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:43, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Low quality, bad Na symbol position (at the right); better versions (for example File:Saponification triglyceride-fr.svg, File:SaponificationGeneral.svg) already exist. Replaced by File:Saponification d'un triglycéride.svg today on fr.wp. Cjp24 (talk) 02:53, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep The file is available under a free licence. The suggested replacement is missing the labels given in the nominated file. From Hill To Shore (talk) 15:01, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- For the sake of clarity, the nomination has changed since I left my rationale.[7] It would be useful if changes could be time stamped to enable readers to follow the flow of the conversation. From Hill To Shore (talk) 00:17, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Cette image est fausse :
- formule : à gauche, erreur : il manque deux liaisons C-C, pour écrire UN triglycéride ;
- formule : pour la glycérine, erreur, il y a un trait vertical en trop ;
- à droite, erreur, le a de Na est en exposant ;
- à droite, le 3 est mal placé et le groupe O-Na est trop à gauche ;
- le a de Na est illisible (trop petit) ;
- la flèche est trop courte ;
- les symboles sont stylisés.
- so picture to delete.
- --Cjp24 (talk) 01:05, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Bonjour,
- J'ai créé cet article dans le cadre d'un travail pour l'université, il contient donc en effet quelques erreures. Sentez-vous libre de le modifier/supprimer comme bon vous semble.
- Bonne journée, Petite Poissonne (talk) 07:28, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
- For the sake of clarity, the nomination has changed since I left my rationale.[7] It would be useful if changes could be time stamped to enable readers to follow the flow of the conversation. From Hill To Shore (talk) 00:17, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:47, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Derivative, COM:TOYS Xunks (talk) 06:02, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- The doll's dress and decoration on the head are my own works. Liilia Moroz (talk) 10:44, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:48, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
The photo itself may or may not be licensed properly by the source website, but there must be the evidence that the original image is free of copyright. Xunks (talk) 06:06, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:48, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
The photo itself may or may not be licensed properly by the source website, but there must be the evidence that the original image is free of copyright. Xunks (talk) 06:08, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:48, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
COM:REDUNDANT as a lower resolution and exaggeratedly higher contrast version of File:Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres - Venus, Injured by Diomedes, Returns to OlympusFXD.jpg. Lord Belbury (talk) 12:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Contrast not exaggerated. Daperro (talk) 23:47, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Compared to existing higher resolution versions, it appears that way:
-
High-res 2019 version -
"Remastered color" version of previous -
File being discussed here
.jpg){kind=link}
![51 File:Chocolate "Eesti" trademark "Kalev".jpg](#File:Chocolate_"Eesti"_trademark_"Kalev".jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_Archives_1924_00_00_Deutschnationalen_Reichstag_1924_Wahlplakat_der_Deutsch-Nationalen_Deutschnationalen_Volkspartei_DNVP_Berlin_Dolchstoßlüge_Dolchstoßlegende_gegen_SPD_Low_res.jpg){kind=link}
_-_Image_documentation_of_a_Scene_Transgender_Photographer_-_May_2019_-_Picture_001.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(8436755810).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436755476).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436753074).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436752744).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435667491).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435669953).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436751732).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436752126).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436751714).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435667911).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435668193).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436754924).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435667071).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436755602).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435670827).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436753862).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436753634).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436752638).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436755174).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435668957).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436754588).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435670695).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436753480).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436755382).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436751052).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435668529).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436752434).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435670449).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436753198).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436754398).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436754118).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435667573).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435666821).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435666701).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8436751554).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435669795).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8435669385).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![06:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/04/17#c-Xunks-2022-04-17T06:33:00.000Z-File:Chocolate_"Eesti"_trademark_"Kalev".jpg){kind=link}
![23:57, 24 April 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/04/17#c-IronGargoyle-2022-04-24T23:57:00.000Z-File:Chocolate_"Eesti"_trademark_"Kalev".jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[7]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3ADeletion_requests%2FFile%3AFormule_chimique_saponification_%C3%A0_froid.png&type=revision&diff=649547451&oldid=649472616){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:53, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Araz Yaquboglu (talk · contribs)
[edit]Uploader requested deletion. Courtesy deletion of recent and unused uploads.
- File:Əsgərov Bəxtiyar.jpg
- File:Bəxtiyar Hüseynalı oğlu.jpg
- File:Əsgərov Bəxtiyar H.o.jpg
- File:Əsgərov Bəxtiyar H.o. 2018.jpg
- File:Əsgərov Bəxtiyar Hüseynalı o.jpg
- File:Bəxtiyar Hüseynalı oğlu Əsgərov.jpg
- File:Bəxtiyar Əsgərov 2018.jpg
- File:Bəxtiyar Əsgərov (2018).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 03:17, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Araz Yaquboglu (talk · contribs)
[edit]Violation of the rule Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Azerbaijan
Maxinvestigator (talk) 05:47, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Arthur Crbz (talk) 08:41, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Araz Yaquboglu (talk · contribs)
[edit]http://agf.az/en/gallery/photo/avropa_gimnastika_ittifaqinin_27_ci_konqresi__split__xorvatiya__/
Patrick Rogel (talk) 23:45, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:13, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Araz Yaquboglu (talk · contribs)
[edit]Too many cameras (at least 15) to be true, unlikely to be own works.
- File:Tərlan Qasımov.jpg
- File:Ferid Gayıbov-6.jpg
- File:Rafiq Bayramov “Hyatt Regency-Naxçıvan”da.jpg
- File:Rafiq Bayramov.jpg
- File:Rafiq Bayramov (alim).jpg
- File:Vaqif Rəhmanov.jpg
- File:Bəxtiyar Məmmədov (jurnalist).jpg
- File:Qalib İmanov.jpg
- File:Fərhad Turanlı.jpg
- File:Cavanşir Feyziyev-3.jpg
- File:Cavanşir Feyziyev-2.jpg
- File:Namiq Əliyev (jurnalist).jpg
- File:Hafiz Baxşəliyev.jpg
- File:Abel Məhərrəmov 0091.jpg
- File:Abel Məhərrəmov 0066.jpg
- File:Abel Məhərrəmov 0090.jpg
- File:Abel Məhərrəmov.jpg
- File:Abel Məhərrəmov 0059.jpg
- File:Abel Məhərrəmov 0062.jpg
- File:Abel Məhərrəmov 0056.jpg
- File:Abel Məhərrəmov 0053.jpg
- File:Abel Məhərrəmov 0052.jpg
- File:Abel Məhərrəmov 0051.jpg
- File:Abel Məhərrəmov 0047.jpg
- File:Abel Məhərrəmov 0046.jpg
- File:Füzuli Sabiroğlu (2009).jpg
- File:Füzuli Sabiroğlu 2013.jpg
- File:Farid Gayibov.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif - 219.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif - 116.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif - 5298.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif - tribuna.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif - 4054.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif danışarkən.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif - Tərtər.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif - 8715.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif - RİH.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif - RIH.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif - 8575.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif - 8714.jpg
- File:Əsgərov Bəxtiyar Hüseynalı oğlu.jpg
- File:Bəxtiyar Əsgərov (siyasətçi).jpg
- File:Bəxtiyar Əsgərov.jpg
- File:Faiq İsmayılov (2014).jpg
- File:Şair Maarif Köçkün övladları Elçin və Emin ilə.jpg
- File:Şair Maarif Köçkün.jpg
- File:Maarif Köçkün.jpg
- File:Əli bəy Azəri.jpg
- File:Xaqani Yusif oğlu Hüseynzadə.jpg
- File:Nazir Əhmədli (2017).jpg
- File:Nazir Əhmədli.jpg
- File:Araz Yaquboğlu 0015.jpg
- File:Araz Yaquboğlu 0008.jpg
File:Karen Kokburn.jpg- File:İsmayılov Cavid Əjdər oğlu.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif Qarabağ müharibəsi veteranları ilə.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif və Suliddin Yusifov.jpg
- File:Jurnalist Tofiq Yusif.jpg
- File:Yazıçı Tofiq Yusif.jpg
- File:Şair Tofiq Yusif.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif oğlu Hüsеynov.jpg
- File:Hüsеynov Tofiq.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif ordenlə.jpg
- File:Vahid Novruzov - 2013.jpg
- File:Ənvər Seyidov.jpg
- File:Mehdi İskəndərli.jpg
- File:Vidadi Süleymanov. 2016.jpg
- File:Vidadi Süleymanov 2016.jpg
- File:Vidadi Süleymanov - 2016.jpg
- File:Rauf Qurbanəliyev.jpg
- File:Rəşad Nəsirov.jpg
- File:Abbas Bağır.jpg
- File:Afət xanım.jpg
- File:Abbas Bağırov (həkim).jpg
- File:Fəxrəddin Teyyub.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Patrick Rogel (talk) 22:39, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
- Delete I've used several cameras, but there doesn't seem to be a pattern here. File:Tofiq_Yusif_-_tribuna.jpg uses the Nikon D7100 (a mid-range DSLR) in 2015, goes to the Nikon D3 in 2016 for File:Cavanşir_Feyziyev-3.jpg (full-frame, but otherwise inferior older camera), and then in 2018 is shooting File:Tərlan_Qasımov.jpg with the entry level Canon EOS 1100D, which is inferior (except for hand-holding) to the two Nikon cameras previously used? That's not exhaustive, but that doesn't look good.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:20, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
- File:Şair Maarif Köçkün övladları Elçin və Emin ilə.jpg is clearly not own work, at least not as a whole; it's either photoshopped or they're standing before a pre-printed background.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:58, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- I looked at two random files, and one of them, File:Karen Kokburn.jpg is a legit crop of another Commons file. Have we made a good work? --E4024 (talk) 03:22, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
- Among those 15 cameras there must be at least one that belongs to this user, for sure. [I use not only 3-4 cellphones myself, but also force people to take the pic of the plate of food before them at the table, at times, not to stand up and disturb other people myself; or simply because my old-fashioned phone has no space of memory left, and I receive them by bluetooth or mail. They are my pics. (Indeed generally those people delete the pic immediately from their phones, shaking their head to both sides and rolling their eyes on me... :)] I guess this picture shows the user clearly, making a selfie. Therefore we cannot delete any pic taken with that same cellphone, although I have no idea if we have any image taken with it here, at this DR. I hope these details will be taken care of and sorry for my personal-ish chat within brackets. --E4024 (talk) 02:32, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
- Keep I see no problems with using different cameras. Araz Yaguboghlu is a famous journalist, so owning (buying and selling) a lot of cameras should not be a ground for a copyright violation. Prediction should not be a tool in this type of situation.--Toghrul Rahimli (talk) 11:59, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
- It certainly is suspicious. To be short, a journalist is going to use the same camera (so they're maximally familiar with it) and tend to upgrade within brands (so they keep that familiarity) and if possible keep the same lens mount (i.e. Nikon F mount, or Canon EF mount). (Professional photographers have a lot of expensive lenses that sometimes singly cost more than the camera body they're attached to.) If you're a famous journalist who can afford to own a lot of cameras, you're not going to go backwards; you're going to replace cameras with better ones, not used and inferior equipment.
- (To expand: Anyone who shoots their own camera is not going to go through a lot of cameras; you have one set up the way you like it, and use it. They're also going to jump to clearly better cameras. I'm skeptical of a journalist going from the Nikon D7100 to the Nikon D3; you lose more than you gain, especially for a journalist. (A paparazzi might gain more.) If you've broken it, it's a $1K camera, easily replaceable for a famous journalist, and why replace it with a model that had been superseded six years ago instead of a D4S or D5 or D810? And then why go to a Canon EOS 1100D, which stopped being made in 2014? The Canon EOS 2000D is its successor, and is only $500. And if you're a journalist instead of a photographer, why switch brands? You know the Nikon controls, and you've sunk money into Nikon lenses, so the D3400 is about as light and capable as the EOS 2000D, and you don't have to spend extra money on lenses. As a bit of a photography geek, I can't see why anyone would use this series of cameras for serious work.)--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:32, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: very likely copyright violations, considering the different cameras and styles. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:43, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Araz Yaquboglu (talk · contribs)
[edit]Problem seems not have been solved with the last batch of may 2019: too many cameras from different brands.
- File:Mahir Abbaszadə 08.01.2020.jpg : found cropped
- File:Ali A.H.jpg
- File:Ağayarov Şərif Ziyadxan oğlu.jpg
- File:Ələddin Allahverdiyev 02-12-2019.jpg
- File:Ələddin Allahverdiyev 2019.jpg
- File:Ələddin Allahverdiyev 2019-12-02.jpg
- File:Nəriman Cavadov.jpg
- File:Hüseynli Səyavuş.jpg
- File:Tofiq Yusif 2019.jpg
- File:Məmmədov A.N.jpg
- File:Aliq Nağı oğlu Məmmədov.jpg
- File:Мамедов, Алиг Наги оглу.jpg
- File:Məmmədov Aliq Nağı oğlu.jpg
- File:Aliq Nağıoğlu.jpg
- File:Aydın Məmmədov (tarixçi).jpg
- File:Telman İmanov.jpg
- File:Səyyarə Oruc qızı Məmmədli.jpg
- File:Mətin Quliyev.jpg
- File:Rəssam Vaqif Ucatay.jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:22, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- Could you do the analysis please? You cannot expect folks reading this DR to examine the metadata on 19 different files to check the pattern of kit used. --Fæ (talk) 16:37, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- Pinging @E4024: , @Prosfilaes: and @Srittau: . --Patrick Rogel (talk) 17:31, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- As this is probably not easy, on the presumption I might reuse such a query, I put one together:
- Canon EOS 5D Mark II File:Hüseynli Səyavuş.jpg
- Canon EOS 5D Mark III File:Ələddin Allahverdiyev 02-12-2019.jpg
- Canon EOS 5D Mark III File:Ələddin Allahverdiyev 2019.jpg
- Canon EOS 5D Mark III File:Ələddin Allahverdiyev 2019-12-02.jpg
- Canon EOS 60D File:Nəriman Cavadov.jpg
- Canon PowerShot A3150 IS File:Aliq Nağı oğlu Məmmədov.jpg
- Canon PowerShot A3150 IS File:Мамедов, Алиг Наги оглу.jpg
- Canon PowerShot A3150 IS File:Məmmədov Aliq Nağı oğlu.jpg
- Canon PowerShot A3150 IS File:Aliq Nağıoğlu.jpg
- NIKON D3 File:Mahir Abbaszadə 08.01.2020.jpg
- NIKON D300 File:Rəssam Vaqif Ucatay.jpg
- NIKON D7100 File:Tofiq Yusif 2019.jpg
- NIKON D7100 File:Telman İmanov.jpg
- NIKON D800 File:Ağayarov Şərif Ziyadxan oğlu.jpg
- NIKON D90 File:Aydın Məmmədov (tarixçi).jpg
- NIKON D90 File:Səyyarə Oruc qızı Məmmədli.jpg
- Not given File:Ali A.H.jpg
- Not given File:Məmmədov A.N.jpg
- Not given File:Mətin Quliyev.jpg
- Delete In 2019-2020, he used a Nikon D3, Nikon D7100 and a Canon EOS 5D Mark III?!? If you have money to burn, get some new cameras. If you're actually a working journalist, get one good camera and use it. All three are decent cameras, but all three have different controls (which is something no professional journalist has time to deal with) and all three optimally use different lenses--given that all of these were several years obsolete in 2019, who's got money for that? There's an argument for putting money into the lenses instead of the camera body in photography circles, which would explain why the cameras are old, but means he absolutely shouldn't be using three mostly-incompatible models. I'm personally appalled by the PowerShot--it's 2019, get a cellphone--but I guess I could see it. But if you're dragging around an old PowerShot, that screams "get the job done" not "photography enthusiast"; you'd have one interchangable-lens camera, not three.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:01, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- My edits through Commons are much more than uploaded files. Starting from today I will ensure you that above-mentioned problems do not happen once more. You may delete the files indicated by you in my Talk Page, if appropriate. I do not see any problem in such deletion. --Araz Yaquboglu (talk) 05:29, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 00:52, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Araz Yaquboglu (talk · contribs)
[edit]Official document and logo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.
- File:"Laçın" döş nişanı.png
- File:Polad Həşimova verilən Şah İsmayıl Xətai adına Fəxri Fərman.jpg
- File:Milli Azərbaycan Tarixi Muzeyi (məktub).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:42, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, all of the files are copyrighted. Delete. Kadı Message 14:08, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:55, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
It's a poor-contrast version of File:Special Negatives. Street BAnQ P48S1P02157 contrast.jpg and has incorrect info that has already led to confusion on French Wikipedia here. This is looking northward towards en:Roddick Gates on en:McGill College Avenue NOT en:University Street, as noted correctly on the other version. (talk) 19:49, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:00, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Miwako Sato as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Not the user's own work, but generally found on the internet, see Google Image May be old enough. Yann (talk) 21:19, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, missing essential info. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:02, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
The text says it already: Only allowed when the work is an "accessory compared to the main represented or handled subject". The image is even titled after the movie poster, it is the obvious main subject. 178.1.43.164 22:56, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:00, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Derivative of the non-free modern sculpture, no FOP in Lithuania. Xunks (talk) 06:16, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:05, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Derivatives, no permission Xunks (talk) 06:20, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:06, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Derivative of the non-free modern sculpture, no FOP in Estonia. Xunks (talk) 06:23, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Derivatives, no author's permission. Xunks (talk) 06:24, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative of the modern artwork, no permission, no FoP in Lithuania. Xunks (talk) 06:37, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Derivative of the modern artwork, no permission, no FoP in Estonia. Xunks (talk) 06:40, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
There is no FoP in Cambodia. 沈澄心✉ 13:48, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Source link is a private video--source/evidence to substantiate CC claim is needed. YouTube uploader's other videos are not CC licensed. Эlcobbola talk 15:17, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:10, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation. This postcard is not 70 years or older. JopkeB (talk) 15:28, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:10, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
I want to delete this file altogether by deleting my account too 7kg8kb (talk) 03:57, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: courtesy deletion of unused promotional book cover. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:03, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Both of these images are photos of the uploader. They are obviously not selfies, so the "own work" claim cannot be correct. They are also small and have no EXIF. The watermark on he first one makes it useless.
. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:27, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Hello good time
- I have no bad intentions, I just want to publish my personal photos as an artist
- I have Actor profiles on IMDB and Artist profiles on Spotify and Apple Music and other global and international platforms.
- My songs are globally recognized and copyrighted
- I'm an Artist and Actor just going to publish my personal photos and I'm not going bad
- Please do not delete my photos
- My accounts on global platforms:
- https://pro.imdb.com/name/nm13562208?ref_=hm_prof_name
- https://open.spotify.com/artist/dr_ahora
- Link: https://music.apple.com/artist/1618100367
- https://distrokid.com/dr_ahora
- https://www.instagram.com/dr_ahora/
- https://www.facebook.com/drahoraa
- https://www.linkedin.com/in/drahora/
- https://soundcloud.com/dr_ahora
- https://twitter.com/dr_ahora
- https://www.youtube.com/drahora
- https://www.pinterest.com/dr_ahora/_saved/
- https://audiomack.com/dr_ahora
- https://www.twitch.tv/dr_ahora
- https://www.routenote.com/rn/users/dr_ahora
- https://dr-ahora.com/
- My songs have the international UPC ID and ISRC international copyright:
- DK UPC: 196833909907
- ISRC QZHN32249719
- -----
- DK UPC: 196833905275
- ISRC QZHN32251691
- -----
- DK UPC: 196833903806
- ISRC QZHN32251692
- -----
- DK UPC: 196833902557
- ISRC QZHN32251693
- -----
- DK UPC: 196833901895
- ISRC QZHN32251694
- -----
- DK UPC: 196833901239
- ISRC QZHN32295908
- -----
- Please do not delete my photos
- Thank you Dr ahora (talk) 17:35, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete out-of-scope (spam and selfies). Not just "both the images" in the nom, but all uploads by this editor. DMacks (talk) 08:46, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, and out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:56, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Unused promotional/spam photos of non-notable person, COM:WEBHOST, no educational value, out of scope.
- File:Hadihassanpour(dr-ahora)3.jpg
- File:Hadihassanpour(dr-ahora)4.jpg
- File:Hadihassanpour(dr-ahora)5.jpg
- File:Hadihassanpour(dr-ahora)6.jpg
- File:Hadihassanpour(dr-ahora)8.jpg
- File:Hadihassanpour(dr-ahora)9.jpg
- File:Hadihassanpour(dr-ahora)7.jpg
- File:Hadihassanpour(dr-ahora)01.jpg
3.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
4.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
5.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
6.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
8.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
9.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
7.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
01.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:58, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 15:35, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Duplicate of equally nondescript File:Lideres sociales de la comuna 7, de Cali Colombia.jpg 62.216.210.62 08:08, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. That file cited is in use and this is not identical or inferior. IronGargoyle (talk) 00:04, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: not a duplicate. --Rosenzweig τ 11:08, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
No proof of permission of the copyright holder or the portrayed person to publicly transmit or display the photograph, and does not present evidence of meeting the criteria for Public domain or other acceptable circumstances in Brazil. The source mentioned cannot be verified. Awikimate (talk) 16:13, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Keep A imagem é a mesma que: File:D. Pedro Henrique de Orleans e Bragança e família.jpg estando apenas cortada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NewsRoyal (talk • contribs) 17:30, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- This argument is invalid. Neither of these images present evidence of meeting the criteria for Public domain or other acceptable circumstances in Brazil. Moreover, their source mentioned cannot be verified. Awikimate (talk) 21:10, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: source and CC license do check out. --Rosenzweig τ 12:03, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
No proof of permission of the copyright holder or the portrayed person to publicly transmit or display the photograph, and does not present evidence of meeting the criteria for Public domain or other acceptable circumstances in Brazil. The source mentioned cannot be verified. Awikimate (talk) 21:06, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Apologies to all users for submitting a new nomination. The nomination notice initially added to the file's page was incorrectly deleted by a user, and I did not notice that in time. Awikimate (talk) 21:13, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: as before. --Rosenzweig τ 12:03, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
Own work? Certainly not. 91.34.46.43 15:08, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by EugeneZelenko at 14:59, 18 July 2022 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing (F1): Promo/press photo --Krdbot 18:40, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Catedrala din Timisoara.jpg. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:14, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
- Keep see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Catedrala din Timisoara.jpg. --Turbojet (talk) 19:53, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Kept: De minimis. --Yann (talk) 13:58, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
The source image of one of the component images has been deleted as No-FoP Romania violation. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Catedrala din Timisoara.jpg. Unless it is replaced, the entire collage becomes a derivative copyvio. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:56, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. I have no dog in this fight in my capacity as a bureaucrat on Wikivoyage, because we don't use collages, but the de minimis arguments look strong and law-based in regard to the deleted photo itself and even more so when it is only part of a collage. Look at this thread that was closed on 1 June 2017 and Turbojet's arguments in particular. It seems to me that Yann had not had a chance to look at the last thread on the linked page and it was deleted, and the admin who did kind of paid short shrift to the argument that, regardless of the name of the file, "the protected work is not the main subject of photography" and therefore, the "no FoP" argument is irrelevant under Romanian law. Even if the cathedral is the main subject of that photo (which I think is highly debatable), it's definitely not the main subject of this rather small collage. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:30, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: please see Commons:Derivative works. The clage has become the derivative work of an infringing photo, which means that photo must be replaced with one that does not infringe the architect's copyrights. De minimis is not a matter here, but the rule and principle on derivative works. If an image is infringing in the first place, one must not use it and should use a different image (better a lesser famous landmark designed by an architect or sculptor who is dead for more than 70 years than a famous landmark whose its designer is not yet dead for more than 70 years). Similar cases: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Metropolis of Manila.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Paris Montage 02-11-08.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Novy Urengoy Collage 01.png, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Montage of Samarinda.jpg, and Commons:Deletion requests/File:CollageDubai.jpg. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:43, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- I'm arguing that the decision to delete the photo was wrong in the first place. It should be undeleted. But deleting this collage would compound the mistake. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:49, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. The reason for deleting the image used in the collage was not copyright infringement, but at the request of the author, dissatisfied that those who used the image on the net did not give him credit. The deleted image perfectly satisfies the Romanian copyright law, which stipulates that only images in which a single building appears are protected, not those in which several buildings appear. --Turbojet (talk) 05:25, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Per Turbojet. The cathedral is not the main subject of the original image, which makes it eligible for preservation. So the derivative work is also eligible for preservation. --Accipiter Gentilis Q. (talk) 05:57, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep The deleted image (the one at the bottom) is a general view, and the cathedral is only one element among others. Yann (talk) 16:45, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: This has a deleted image and therefore can't be kept unless the deleted image is restored. As the Admin who deleted the image, I don't underestand the comments above -- the cathedral is the central building in the image and the only disticntive one. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:28, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Derivative, COM:TOYS Xunks (talk) 06:11, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- This is a traditional Estonian pattern dating back over a hundred years. Liilia Moroz (talk) 14:01, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- And it is not a toy, it is a mannequin. Liilia Moroz (talk) 14:53, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - Toy or mannequin, in either case it is copyrighted and the image infringes. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:33, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work, no author's permission. Xunks (talk) 06:14, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- How can an illegal counterfeit obtain copyright confirmation? Liilia Moroz (talk) 10:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - counterfeit or simple copy, either way they are copyrighted. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:35, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
No evidence that the author died 70 or more years ago. Xunks (talk) 06:20, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep the correct license is "PD-EU-no author disclosure". --RAN (talk) 01:45, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - subject was born 1898. This would have to have been published before 1926 to beat the URAA date. I think she looks much older than that in the image. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:38, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Possibly above COM:TOO Colombia --Minorax«¦talk¦» 09:16, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
This logo image consists only of simple geometric shapes (CC) and text (Corficolombiana) .--EEIM (talk) 02:06, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: below COM:TOO Andean Community. --Rosenzweig τ 12:41, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
Недостоверные сведения об авторе: "автор" - внучка жениха -- Tomasina (talk) 09:21, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 18:22, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
Own work? Certainly not. 91.34.46.43 15:10, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP; seems to be the work of (another) photographer and not the uploader, so we'd need a COM:VRT permission for this. --Rosenzweig τ 16:34, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
Own work? Certainly not. 91.34.46.43 15:11, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP; seems to be the work of (another) photographer and not the uploader, so we'd need a COM:VRT permission for this. --Rosenzweig τ 16:33, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
File:1924 (D) Archives 1924 00 00 Deutschnationalen Reichstag 1924 Wahlplakat der Deutsch-Nationalen Deutschnationalen Volkspartei DNVP Berlin Dolchstoßlüge Dolchstoßlegende gegen SPD Low res.jpg
[edit]_Archives_1924_00_00_Deutschnationalen_Reichstag_1924_Wahlplakat_der_Deutsch-Nationalen_Deutschnationalen_Volkspartei_DNVP_Berlin_Dolchsto%C3%9Fl%C3%BCge_Dolchsto%C3%9Flegende_gegen_SPD_Low_res.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Archives_1924_00_00_Deutschnationalen_Reichstag_1924_Wahlplakat_der_Deutsch-Nationalen_Deutschnationalen_Volkspartei_DNVP_Berlin_Dolchsto%C3%9Fl%C3%BCge_Dolchsto%C3%9Flegende_gegen_SPD_Low_res.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This work is not by an "unknown" artist as it was claimed. It is a work by Hans Schweitzer (later, starting in 1926, also known as Mjölnir), see the "S" mongram in the lower left corner of the image. The work is still protected by copyright until the end of 2050, and there is no evidence of the CC license it is claimed to be under. The file should therefore be deleted. It can be restored in 2051. Rosenzweig τ 16:32, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Eine Kopie dieses Wahlplakats wurde veröffentlicht beim Westermann-Verlag GmbH, Braunschweig, sowie überarbeitete Ausgabe 1987, Unipart-Verlag GmbH, Remseck bei Stuttgart, in "Kulturspiegel des 20. Jahrhunderts-1900 bis heute", S. 207.
Man kann wohl davon ausgehen, dass der Westermann-Verlag "vor" der Veröffentlichung des Wahlplakates im "Kulturspiegel" 1987 ausreichend das Copyright geprüft haben dürfte.--Fibe101 (talk) 21:03, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- Dass ein Bild irgendwo veröffentlicht wird, heißt ja nicht, dass es gemeinfrei sein muss, wie wir es hier verlangen. Die werden das Bild von einer der Agenturen (Ullsteinbild oder so) bezogen und ihre Gebühr dafür bezahlt haben, und damit war das dann erledigt. Ich habe eine Weile im Verlagswesen gearbeitet, ums Urheberrecht machen die sich da oft erstaunlich wenig Gedanken, wohl auch deswegen, weil sie sich auf viele Ausnahmeregelungen im UrhG berufen können. --Rosenzweig τ 08:21, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- Hier findest Du eine Diskussion zum Thema: Dolchstoßlegende [8] Das zugehörige Bild wird qualifiziert als "public domain". Dolchstoß steht sowohl für Nazi-Propaganda und als für Aktivitäten der SPD (Albert Vater). Es sollten beide Versionen erhalten bleiben. Ich beende dieses Thema. --Fibe101 (talk) 08:07, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Die Behauptung, das Bild sei "Public Domain", ist offensichtlich falsch. Evtl. von irgendwo ohne weitere Nachprüfung abgeschrieben. --Rosenzweig τ 11:25, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Die Behauptung, das Bild sei "Public Domain", ist offensichtlich falsch. Evtl. von irgendwo ohne weitere Nachprüfung abgeschrieben. --Rosenzweig τ 11:25, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- Hier findest Du eine Diskussion zum Thema: Dolchstoßlegende [8] Das zugehörige Bild wird qualifiziert als "public domain". Dolchstoß steht sowohl für Nazi-Propaganda und als für Aktivitäten der SPD (Albert Vater). Es sollten beide Versionen erhalten bleiben. Ich beende dieses Thema. --Fibe101 (talk) 08:07, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
Zunächst habe ich mich an die Druckerei „Dr. Selle & Co., Berlin“, mit der Bitte gewandt, mir mitzuteilen, ob dort noch Unterlagen zu diesem Urheberrecht vorliegen. Die Aussicht auf Erfolg ist gering, jedoch besser, als gar nichts zu unternehmen.
Deine Auffassung, das Urheberrecht läge in diesem Fall allein bei Hans Schweitzer, ist ohne Belege, wie wir hier es verlangen, reine Theoriefindung. Anderen wirfst Du mangelhaften Umgang mit dem Urheberrecht vor. Wir benötigen aber Belege, speziell nur für diesen Fall. Alles einfach abzulehnen, geht gar nicht.
Ich gehe davon aus, dass die DNVP eine Kommission gebildet hatte, die sich insgesamt um die Durchführung der wichtigen Reichstagswahl vom Dezember 1924 kümmern sollte. Nicht auszuschließen ist, dass Schweitzer (aufgrund seines Auffassung) Mitglied eben dieser Kommission war. Dann aber bliebe das Urheberrecht allein bei der DNVP: es ergäbe allenfalls ein zweites vollwertiges Copyright, sofern er das nicht bereits im Vorfeld der Partei überschrieben hatte. Das wäre zu prüfen.
Der Text der letzten Plakatzeile scheint auf ein volles Urheberrecht der Partei hinzuweisen:
Nr. 306 – Deutschnationale (?) Schriftensammelstelle (unleserlich ?) Berlin SW 41 – Druckerei Dr. Selle Berlin.
Auch ist anzumerken, dass sich der Schöpfer eines Werkes eines Gehilfen bedienen darf, sofern er selbst bestimmte Fertigkeiten zur Erstellung des Werkes nicht besitzt. Der Gehilfe erwirbt dann kein – eigenes – Urheberrecht.
Die Kernaussage des Plakats ist nicht die reißerische Farbgestaltung, sondern der Text vom SPD-Funktionär Albert Vater. Auch hier bestand ein „Urheberrecht“. Ob die betreffenden Angaben dem Geschichtsverlauf entsprechen, ist urheberrechtlich nicht relevant, sollte aber kommentiert werden.
Infolge der Zeitgeschichte landete das Urheberrecht bei der Bundesrepublik! Die darf sehr wohl entscheiden „public domain“! Also alles richtig, keinerlei Verstoß gegen Urheberrechte! Es gibt niemanden, der sich über angeblichen Missbrauch vom Copyright beklagen könnte.
Dieser Löschantrag benötigt lediglich mehr Diskutanten.--Fibe101 (talk) 13:29, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- Ich habe nicht den Eindruck, dass du dich in Sachen Urheberrecht auskennst. Das deutsche Urheberrechtsgesetz sagt eindeutig, dass das Urheberrecht eben beim Urheber bleibt (Auftraggeber wie hier die DNVP haben je nach Vertrag evtl. Nutzungsrechte), nach dessen Tod bei seinen Erben, und zwar für einen Zeitraum von 70 Jahren nach dem Tod des Urhebers. Urheber ist immer eine natürliche Person (von ein paar Ausnahmefällen in alten Gesetzen abgesehen, die hier aber nicht greifen, weil keine de:Körperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts als Herausgeber auftritt). de:Albert Vater ist 1923 gestorben, dessen Werke sind also seit Anfang 1994 gemeinfrei. Gibt es gar keine persönlichen Erben, kann letzten Endes der Staat erben, aber nicht der Bund, sondern das Bundesland des letzten Wohnsitzes, hier also vermutlich Rheinland-Pfalz (Schweitzer starb in Landstuhl). Das wäre aber nachzuweisen, ebenso wie eine vermutete Freigabe unter einer freien Lizenz o. ä. --Rosenzweig τ 15:06, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- PS: Hier ist eine höher aufgelöste Version beim Deutschen Historischen Museum. Die sind anscheinend auch ziemlich ahnungslos in Sachen Urheberrecht und tun mit der Angabe © Deutsches Historisches Museum, Berlin so, als verfügten sie über Rechte an diesem Objekt aus ihrer Sammlung. Ein klarer Fall von de:Copyfraud. --Rosenzweig τ 15:11, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- Vielen Dank für die juristischen Erläuterungen. Dennoch bleibt ungeklärt, ob Schweitzer das Plakat allein - ohne Mitgestalter - geschaffen hatte. Juristische Personen sind in Deutschland vom Urheberrecht ausgeschlossen, seit wann? Schweitzer wäre noch heute begeistert, könnte er erfahren, dass sein "Werk" noch veröffentlich wird. Mir fehlt nach wie vor eine 2. Meinung. Wird das Plakat tatsächlich gelöscht, wo wird eben allein der Text von Alfred Vater: "Wir haben unsere Leute.....zur Fahnenflucht veranlaßt" usw veröffentlicht. Fibe101 (talk) 08:55, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- Was sollte sich ändern, wenn es außer Schweitzer noch weitere Urheber gäbe? Die Schutzfrist könnte sich dann sogar verlängern, denn bei gemeinsamer Urheberschaft berechnet sich die Schutzfrist nach den Lebensdaten des zuletzt Gestorbenen. Das geltende de:Urheberrechtsgesetz (Deutschland) ist von 1965, die (hier nicht zutreffende) Regelung für "Juristische Personen des öffentlichen Rechtes, die als Herausgeber ein Werk erscheinen lassen, das den Namen des Urhebers nicht angibt", findet sich im Vorgängergesetz KUG (für Werke der bildenden Künste) und ähnlich im anderen Vorgängergesetz LUG (für Werke der Literatur). --Rosenzweig τ 09:09, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- Schön, also könnte die DNVP sehr wohl als juristische Person als Urheber gelten, zumals das "S" wohl kaum als Namensnennung bezeichnet werden kann. Laufzeit wären 70 Jahre. Es ist einfach nicht vorstellbar, dass sich Schweitzer in eine Ecke gesetzt hatte, um allein ein Wahlplakat zu erstellen, das tausendfach im gesamten Reichsgebiet ausgehängt werden sollte. Es meldet sich dazu niemand mehr. Das Urheberrecht hat sich mehrfach gewandelt. Entscheidend ist wohl 1924 und nocht 2022. Tschüs Fibe101 (talk) 12:03, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- Nein. Parteien sind keine juristischen Personen des öffentlichen Rechts, sondern eine Sonderform der Vereine, also juristische Personen des Privatrechts. Es bedarf auch keiner Namensnennung, sondern es reicht aus, dass der Urheber irgendwie bekannt wird. Dazu ist eine Künstlersignatur vollkommen ausreichend. --Rosenzweig τ 12:11, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- Tut mir leid - muss nochmals stören. Im Wikipedia-Artikel "Albert Vater", Einzelnachweise, wird das Plakat aufgeführt: Es gehört zum Bestand des Historischen Museums Berlin, Inv.-Nr. P61/1551, auf das beim Museum befindliche Copyright wird ausdrücklich hingewiesen. Dort wirst Du sicherlich Gehör finden und Deine Probleme los werden. Ggf. ist auch das zweite, von Dir angegriffene Plakat dort zu finden. Fibe101 (talk) 21:04, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- Dass das Deutsche Historische Museum zu diesem Thema Unfug verbreitet, hatte ich schon vor zwei Tagen hier erwähnt und verlinkt. --Rosenzweig τ 21:31, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- Ich habe trotzdem das Deutsche Historische Museum mit der Bitte angeschrieben, zum Urheberrecht bezüglich des Plakats Stellung zu nehmen. Fibe101 (talk) 07:21, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ich habe trotzdem das Deutsche Historische Museum mit der Bitte angeschrieben, zum Urheberrecht bezüglich des Plakats Stellung zu nehmen. Fibe101 (talk) 07:21, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- Dass das Deutsche Historische Museum zu diesem Thema Unfug verbreitet, hatte ich schon vor zwei Tagen hier erwähnt und verlinkt. --Rosenzweig τ 21:31, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- Tut mir leid - muss nochmals stören. Im Wikipedia-Artikel "Albert Vater", Einzelnachweise, wird das Plakat aufgeführt: Es gehört zum Bestand des Historischen Museums Berlin, Inv.-Nr. P61/1551, auf das beim Museum befindliche Copyright wird ausdrücklich hingewiesen. Dort wirst Du sicherlich Gehör finden und Deine Probleme los werden. Ggf. ist auch das zweite, von Dir angegriffene Plakat dort zu finden. Fibe101 (talk) 21:04, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- Nein. Parteien sind keine juristischen Personen des öffentlichen Rechts, sondern eine Sonderform der Vereine, also juristische Personen des Privatrechts. Es bedarf auch keiner Namensnennung, sondern es reicht aus, dass der Urheber irgendwie bekannt wird. Dazu ist eine Künstlersignatur vollkommen ausreichend. --Rosenzweig τ 12:11, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- Schön, also könnte die DNVP sehr wohl als juristische Person als Urheber gelten, zumals das "S" wohl kaum als Namensnennung bezeichnet werden kann. Laufzeit wären 70 Jahre. Es ist einfach nicht vorstellbar, dass sich Schweitzer in eine Ecke gesetzt hatte, um allein ein Wahlplakat zu erstellen, das tausendfach im gesamten Reichsgebiet ausgehängt werden sollte. Es meldet sich dazu niemand mehr. Das Urheberrecht hat sich mehrfach gewandelt. Entscheidend ist wohl 1924 und nocht 2022. Tschüs Fibe101 (talk) 12:03, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- Was sollte sich ändern, wenn es außer Schweitzer noch weitere Urheber gäbe? Die Schutzfrist könnte sich dann sogar verlängern, denn bei gemeinsamer Urheberschaft berechnet sich die Schutzfrist nach den Lebensdaten des zuletzt Gestorbenen. Das geltende de:Urheberrechtsgesetz (Deutschland) ist von 1965, die (hier nicht zutreffende) Regelung für "Juristische Personen des öffentlichen Rechtes, die als Herausgeber ein Werk erscheinen lassen, das den Namen des Urhebers nicht angibt", findet sich im Vorgängergesetz KUG (für Werke der bildenden Künste) und ähnlich im anderen Vorgängergesetz LUG (für Werke der Literatur). --Rosenzweig τ 09:09, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- Vielen Dank für die juristischen Erläuterungen. Dennoch bleibt ungeklärt, ob Schweitzer das Plakat allein - ohne Mitgestalter - geschaffen hatte. Juristische Personen sind in Deutschland vom Urheberrecht ausgeschlossen, seit wann? Schweitzer wäre noch heute begeistert, könnte er erfahren, dass sein "Werk" noch veröffentlich wird. Mir fehlt nach wie vor eine 2. Meinung. Wird das Plakat tatsächlich gelöscht, wo wird eben allein der Text von Alfred Vater: "Wir haben unsere Leute.....zur Fahnenflucht veranlaßt" usw veröffentlicht. Fibe101 (talk) 08:55, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Vom DHM habe ich bisher nur eine dürftige Auskunft erhalten - hier muss ich nachfragen.
Schweitzer hatte ausreichend Gelegenheit, sich bis zum Lebensende um den Schutz seines Urheberrechtes zu kümmern, gleiches gilt für seine Nachkommen. Sofern das Plakat gelöscht wird, möchte ich nur den Text von Albert Vater ausschneiden und mittels Bild oder neuem eigenständigen Poster hochladen. Dessen Urheberrecht ist erloschen; Bedenken dürften insoweit nicht bestehen.--Fibe101 (talk) 07:41, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Fibe101 Sorry, da hast du einen Denkfehler. Niemand muss sich um den Schutz seines Urheberrechts kümmern. Das Urheberrecht besteht automatisch und geht nach dem Tod für 70 Jahre auf die Erben über. Auch ohne Kümmern. Raymond 08:39, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Raymond Da da hast du zweifellos Recht; es ist aber nicht verboten! Was bedeudet denn dieser Zusatz beim Deutschen Historischen Museum - © Deutsches Historisches Museum, Berlin - ?--Fibe101 (talk) 07:39, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Fibe101 Da gibt es mehrere Möglichkeiten: 1) das DHM hat die vollständigen Nutzungsrechte des Urhebers erworben/geschenkt bekommen. 2) Das DHM denkt, weil es vielleicht das Original besitzt, auch die Nutzungsrechte zu haben. Das nennt sich dann Schutzrechtsberühmung/Copyfraud genannt. Ob 1) oder 2) zutrifft, weiß ich nicht, ich hatte noch nie mit dem DHM zu tun. 2) kommt - aus verschiedensten Gründen - leider recht häufig vor. Raymond 07:48, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Raymond Da liege ich also gar nicht falsch mit meiner Behauptung, dass die BRD bzw. die Alliierten oder beide gemeinsam den Nazi-Nachlass samt Urheberrecht an zuverlässige Institutionen abgaben, sofern keine Vernichtung anstand. Das ist zwar auch "Theoriefindung", aber bekannter Teil der deutschen Geschichte. Dank, nun habe ich ein schönes Wochende.--Fibe101 (talk) 08:35, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ich darf mich ein wenig verbessern: Klar, vollständigen Nutzungsrechte wurden damals übertragen. Fibe101 (talk) 19:23, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- Und auf welcher Rechtsgrundlage hätte das geschehen sollen? --Rosenzweig τ 12:42, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
- Und auf welcher Rechtsgrundlage hätte das geschehen sollen? --Rosenzweig τ 12:42, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ich darf mich ein wenig verbessern: Klar, vollständigen Nutzungsrechte wurden damals übertragen. Fibe101 (talk) 19:23, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Raymond Da liege ich also gar nicht falsch mit meiner Behauptung, dass die BRD bzw. die Alliierten oder beide gemeinsam den Nazi-Nachlass samt Urheberrecht an zuverlässige Institutionen abgaben, sofern keine Vernichtung anstand. Das ist zwar auch "Theoriefindung", aber bekannter Teil der deutschen Geschichte. Dank, nun habe ich ein schönes Wochende.--Fibe101 (talk) 08:35, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Fibe101 Da gibt es mehrere Möglichkeiten: 1) das DHM hat die vollständigen Nutzungsrechte des Urhebers erworben/geschenkt bekommen. 2) Das DHM denkt, weil es vielleicht das Original besitzt, auch die Nutzungsrechte zu haben. Das nennt sich dann Schutzrechtsberühmung/Copyfraud genannt. Ob 1) oder 2) zutrifft, weiß ich nicht, ich hatte noch nie mit dem DHM zu tun. 2) kommt - aus verschiedensten Gründen - leider recht häufig vor. Raymond 07:48, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Raymond Da da hast du zweifellos Recht; es ist aber nicht verboten! Was bedeudet denn dieser Zusatz beim Deutschen Historischen Museum - © Deutsches Historisches Museum, Berlin - ?--Fibe101 (talk) 07:39, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
@Raymond Das DHM teilt auf Anfrage mit: "Wir machen die Nutzungrechte an der Reprovorlage (die in unserem Haus erstellt wurde) geltend, darauf bezieht sich das © -Zeichen im Text. Der Westermann Verlag muss die Nutzungsrechte am Plakat selbst ebenfalls klären. Ob dies geschehen ist, vermag ich nicht zu sagen.....Und zu den (möglichen Nutzungsrechten -fb) Vereinbarungen zwischen Künstler und Partei kann ich leider auch keine Aussagen machen".
Fazit: Unfug zu behaupten und einfach zu löschen - ohne den Versuch einer Nachprüfung zu machen, ist wohl tatsächlich Unfug. Nicht jede Vereinbarung bedarf der Schriftform--Fibe101 (talk) 08:33, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Übersetzt heißt das: Das Museum weiß zur Urheberrechtssituation des Plakats rein gar nichts. --Rosenzweig τ 08:46, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Du möchtest das Urheberrecht Schweitzers unbedingt schützen. OK. Dann aber könntest Du nach Ablauf der Sperre rechtzeitig dafür sorgen, dass dann dieses Plakat wieder automatisch eingestellt wird. Letztendlich ist es auch ein Dokument der Zeitgeschichte.
- Es gibt übrigens einen Beschluß der Europäischen Union zur Behandlung von "verwaisten" Urheberrechten, Richtlinie 2012/28/EU vom Oktober 2012, den scheinen die Museen anzuwenden, auch wenn er hier nach Deinen Feststellungen nicht angewendet werden darf. Fibe101 (talk) 16:31, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Urheberrechte zu achten und hier nur freie Medien bereitzustellen (dazu zählen die "verwaisten" nicht) ist das Grundprinzip von Wikimedia Commons. Siehe Commons:Project scope, gibt es auch auf Deutsch: Commons:Project_scope/de. Und ich habe von Anfang hier geschrieben, dass die Datei 2051 wiederhergestellt werden kann, und diese Löschantragsseite in die entsprechende Category:Undelete in 2051 gestellt, die eben dieses bewirken wird. Prinzipiell rate ich dir, dich mal gründlich darüber zu informieren, was Wikimedia Commons ist, was seine Ziele sind und wie es funktioniert. Das ist problemlos möglich, es gibt umfangreiche Hilfeseiten. Dass du zu diesen Themen kaum etwas weißt, zeigen deine Beiträge überdeutlich. --Rosenzweig τ 17:38, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Es wird Zeit, "Tacheles" zu reden: Wie alle Deutschen musste sich Schweitzer einer "Entnazifizierungskommission" unterstellen. Dort hat man ihm beigebracht, dass seine-Nazi-Kunst unerwünscht ist und eingezogen wird. Außerdem verlöre er auf Dauer alle Rechte an seinen Werken. Um den "Persilschein" zu bekommen, willigte Schnitzler wohl ein. Was blieb ihm sonst übrig?
- Ich war nicht dabei; diese Praxis war damals Standard. Bis zu seinem Tod hätte Schweitzer ausreichend Zeit gehabt, seine Urheberrechte wiederherstellen zu lassen. Schließlich wurden seine Werke in Museen und Verlagen veröffentlicht. Das aber machte er anscheinend nicht, vermutlich war er stolz auf seine Arbeiten. Wikipedia gab es damals noch nicht!
- Aber etwas anderes kommt von dort: Bei uns arbeiten Freiwillige; alle Auskünfte sind unverbindlich! Fibe101 (talk) 05:41, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Dass im Zuge der Entnazifizierung irgendwelche Urheberrechte für ungültig erklärt wurden, halte ich für ein ziemlich wildes Gerücht. Für so eine These bräuchte es sehr solide Belege. Selbst die Urheberrechte von Hitler persönlich galten schließlich noch für volle 70 Jahre nach seinem Tod bis Ende 2015 (die hatte ein Gericht in der Nachkriegszeit an den Freistaat Bayern übertragen, der dann mit ihnen Nachdrucke von "Mein Kampf" verhindert hat). Es gab also nichts "wiederherzustellen". --Rosenzweig τ 11:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ich habe auch noch nie davon gelesen, dass im Zuge der Entnazifierung die Urheberrechte aberkennt/eingezogen worden wären. Was nichts heißen muss, da mein Wissen über die Entnazifierungverfahren recht rudimentär ist. Aber in über 18 Jahre Urheberrechtsdiskussion in der WIkipedia kam mir das noch nicht unter. Dafür bräuchte es jedenfalls mal juristische Literatur. Ansonsten gilt: Ein Urheber muss seine Urheberrechte nicht wiederherstellen lassen, da diese immer gelten. Es spielt auf keine Rolle, ob der Urheber ein guter oder ein böser Mensch war. Das Urheberrecht gilt für alle. Raymond 15:55, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ihr belegt gerade mit Euren Angaben, dass Urheberrechte (damals mit Nazi-Hintergrund) sehr wohl suspendiert, eingeschränkt oder übertragen werden können, so dass eventuelle Erben keinen Zugriff hatten. Es bedarf hierzu keiner Gerüchte. Das Übel sollte ausgemerzt werden! Ähnlich könnte das auch bei Schnitzler gelaufen sein. Sofern es dafür Belege gäbe, so lägen diese in den Archiven der 4 Besatzungsmächte oder in vielfältigen Archiven deutscher Behörden. Ein jeder hatte unterschiedliche Vorstellungen. Nachforschungen sind sinnlos, so dass jede Seite "Recht" behalten darf. Fibe101 (talk) 08:02, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Nach § 72 UrhG sind Bildwerke lediglich für 50 Jahre gesperrt und dann gemeinfrei, das hatte ich bisher übersehen. Urheberrecht darf daher hier nicht angewendet werden. Fibe101 (talk) 07:18, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- In § 72 geht es um Lichtbilder, also eine Art besonders simpler Fotografien. Auf eine Zeichnung wie diese trifft der daher überhaupt nicht zu. --Rosenzweig τ 09:00, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Nach § 72 UrhG sind Bildwerke lediglich für 50 Jahre gesperrt und dann gemeinfrei, das hatte ich bisher übersehen. Urheberrecht darf daher hier nicht angewendet werden. Fibe101 (talk) 07:18, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Ihr belegt gerade mit Euren Angaben, dass Urheberrechte (damals mit Nazi-Hintergrund) sehr wohl suspendiert, eingeschränkt oder übertragen werden können, so dass eventuelle Erben keinen Zugriff hatten. Es bedarf hierzu keiner Gerüchte. Das Übel sollte ausgemerzt werden! Ähnlich könnte das auch bei Schnitzler gelaufen sein. Sofern es dafür Belege gäbe, so lägen diese in den Archiven der 4 Besatzungsmächte oder in vielfältigen Archiven deutscher Behörden. Ein jeder hatte unterschiedliche Vorstellungen. Nachforschungen sind sinnlos, so dass jede Seite "Recht" behalten darf. Fibe101 (talk) 08:02, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Urheberrechte zu achten und hier nur freie Medien bereitzustellen (dazu zählen die "verwaisten" nicht) ist das Grundprinzip von Wikimedia Commons. Siehe Commons:Project scope, gibt es auch auf Deutsch: Commons:Project_scope/de. Und ich habe von Anfang hier geschrieben, dass die Datei 2051 wiederhergestellt werden kann, und diese Löschantragsseite in die entsprechende Category:Undelete in 2051 gestellt, die eben dieses bewirken wird. Prinzipiell rate ich dir, dich mal gründlich darüber zu informieren, was Wikimedia Commons ist, was seine Ziele sind und wie es funktioniert. Das ist problemlos möglich, es gibt umfangreiche Hilfeseiten. Dass du zu diesen Themen kaum etwas weißt, zeigen deine Beiträge überdeutlich. --Rosenzweig τ 17:38, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:19, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) - Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 Trust No Fox in the Green Meadow and No Jew on his Oath German Nazi propaganda anti-Semitic children's book.pdf
[edit]This was uploaded with a CC license, but there is none at the source. The author Elvira Bauer was born in 1915. Even if we don't know anything of her life after she moved to Berlin in 1943, it is very well possible that she lived beyond 1951, which would mean the book is still protected by copyright per the usual 70 years pma formula. The file should therefore be deleted per the precautionary principle unless conclusively shown to be in the public domain or under a free license. Rosenzweig τ 16:53, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Trau keinem Fuchs auf grüner Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid! for JPGs of the individual book pages. --Rosenzweig τ 17:28, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:21, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
File:Reichskolonialbund Auch hier liegt Deutsches Land Koloniale Tage des RKB Dresden 1938 Kolonialbriefmarkenschau Postkarte Werbekarte Hitler Nazi Germany postcard II-B-1 0002 No known copyright.jpg
[edit]
This 1938 German postcard was uploaded with a CC license, but there is none at the source. The artwork is signed ("Theisz" in German Kurrent handwriting I think), so it is not anonymous. A 1938 artist could well have lived beyond 1951, which would mean that the work is still protected by copyright per the usual 70 years pma formula. The file should therefore be deleted per the precautionary principle unless conclusively shown to be in the public domain or under a free license. Rosenzweig τ 17:11, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:21, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
These files, pages from a book (or photographs showing those pages), are claimed to be in the PD . The author Elvira Bauer was born in 1915. Even if we don't know anything of her life after she moved to Berlin in 1943, it is very well possible that she lived beyond 1951, which would mean the book is still protected by copyright per the usual 70 years pma formula. The files should therefore be deleted per the precautionary principle unless conclusively shown to be in the public domain or under a free license.
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 00 COVER FRONT (Suetterlinschrift) archive.org No known copyright restrictions.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 01 TITLE PAGE Ein Bilderbuch fuer Gross und Klein (Suetterlinschrift) No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 02 Der Vater des Juden ist der Teufel (Suetterlinschrift) No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 03 Der Vater des Juden ist der Teufel No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 04 Der Deutsche steht der Jude weicht (Suetterlinschrift) No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 05 Der deutsche ist ein stolzer Mann Dies ist der Jud der groesste Schuft No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 06 Der ewige Jude (the Eternal Jew) Suetterlinschrift No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 07 Der ewige Jude (the Eternal Jew) No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 08 Juedische Namen (Jewish names) Suetterlinschrift No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 09 Juedische Namen (Dr Hirsch Veilchenblau Lindenstein) House signs No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 10 Jud bleibt Jud (Suetterlinschrift) No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 11 Jud bleibt Jud (Jude Itzig Ephraim isst, Pfarrer Christenmann) No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 12 Der Viehjude (Gier nach Geld, Ein Bauer war in grosser Not) Suetterlinschrift No known co.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 13 Der Viehjude (Gier nach Geld, Ein Bauer war in grosser Not) No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 14 Der Sabbat (Am Freitag, zu seinem Jahwegott, prangt er im Zylinderhut) Suetterlin No copy.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 15 Der Sabbat (Am Freitag, zu seinem Jahwegott, prangt er im Zylinderhut) No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 16 Aaron Kahn ein Kaufhaus er sein Eigen nennt, Gib Brot! Ich hungrig bin! (Suetterlin) No k.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 17 Aaron Kahn ein Kaufhaus er sein Eigen nennt, Gib Brot! Ich hungrig bin! (Kaufhausbesitzer.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 18 Isaak Blumenfeld Metzger Ein schmutz'ger Mann (Suetterlinschrift) No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 19 Isaak Blumenfeld Metzger Ein schmutz'ger Mann No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 20 Der juedische Rechtgewalt, beim Judenadvokat (Suetterlinschrift) No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 21 Der juedische Rechtgewalt, beim Judenadvokat No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 22 Das Dienstmaedchen, Arbeitsplatz beim Juden (Suetterlinschrift) No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 23 Das Dienstmaedchen, Arbeitsplatz beim Juden No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 24 Der Jud mag seine eignen Frauen nicht, deutsche Frau (Suetterlinschrift) No known copyrig.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 25 Der Jud mag seine eignen Frauen nicht, deutsche Frau No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 26 Vater, Tochter, Du aber geht aus Eigennutz zum Juden (Suetterlinschrift) No known copyrig.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 27 Vater, Tochter, Du aber geht aus Eigennutz zum Juden No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 28 Der juedische Arzt, Trau einem Judendoktor nicht! (Suetterlinschrift) No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 29 Der juedische Arzt, Trau einem Judendoktor nicht! No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 30 Noch andre Streiche hat der Jud Vollfuehrt mit seinem Satansblut. Ein Kaempfer (Suetterli.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 31 Das ist der Streicher! (Nazi politician and publisher Julius Streicher with children) No.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 32 Streicher hat den Stuermer drucken lassen, seit Jahren kaempft er (Suetterlin) No known c.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 33 Der Stuermer Gauleiter Julius Streicher No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 34 Ins Judenkaufhaus gehn wir nicht! Die Mutter zu dem Kinde spricht (Suetterlin) No known c.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 35 Ins Judenkaufhaus gehn wir nicht! Die Mutter zu dem Kinde spricht (Zabulon Levy) No known.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 36 Nun wird es in den Schulen schoen, Denn alle Juden muessen gehn (Suetterlin) No known cop.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 37 Nun wird es in den Schulen schoen, Denn alle Juden muessen gehn (School children) No know.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 38 In unserm weiten Vaterland, dass Juden unerwuenschet sind! (Suetterlinschrift) No known c.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 39 In unserm weiten Vaterland, dass Juden unerwuenschet sind! No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 40 Des Fuehrers Jugend (Suetterlinschrift) No known copyright.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 41 Des Fuehrers Jugend (Hitlerjugend Jungvolk) No known copyright restrictions.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 42 Im fernen Sueden liegt das Land, wo einst der Juden Wiege stand (Suetterlin) No known cop.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 43 Einbahnstrasse, die Juden sind unser Unglueck (No known copyright restrictions).jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 44 Stuermer-Verlag Nuernberg No known copyright restrictions Old.jpg
- File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 German Nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book 45 COVER BACK Ohne Loesung der Judenfrage keine Erloesung der Menschheit (No known copyright.jpg
- File:Trau keinem Fuchs auf grüner Heid und keinem Jud auf seinem Eid, German anti-Semitic children's book. Nazi propaganda 1936. On display in the Jewish Museum, London, 2017.jpg
- File:Trau keinem Fuchs auf grüner Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid! Elvira Bauer antisemitisch Kinderbuch 1936 Stürmer-Verlag German nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book Juden unerwuenscht (Holocaust exhibition HL-senteret Oslo).jpg
- File:Trau keinem Fuchs auf grüner Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid! Elvira Bauer antisemitisch Kinderbuch 1936 Stürmer-Verlag German nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book Sütterlin (Holocaust exhibition HL-senteret Oslo) A.jpg
- File:Trau keinem Fuchs auf grüner Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid! Elvira Bauer antisemitisch Kinderbuch 1936 Stürmer-Verlag German nazi propaganda antisemitic children's book Sütterlin (Holocaust exhibition HL-senteret Oslo) B.jpg
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_00_COVER_FRONT_(Suetterlinschrift)_archive.org_No_known_copyright_restrictions.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_01_TITLE_PAGE_Ein_Bilderbuch_fuer_Gross_und_Klein_(Suetterlinschrift)_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_02_Der_Vater_des_Juden_ist_der_Teufel_(Suetterlinschrift)_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_03_Der_Vater_des_Juden_ist_der_Teufel_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_04_Der_Deutsche_steht_der_Jude_weicht_(Suetterlinschrift)_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_05_Der_deutsche_ist_ein_stolzer_Mann_Dies_ist_der_Jud_der_groesste_Schuft_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_06_Der_ewige_Jude_(the_Eternal_Jew)_Suetterlinschrift_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_07_Der_ewige_Jude_(the_Eternal_Jew)_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_08_Juedische_Namen_(Jewish_names)_Suetterlinschrift_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_09_Juedische_Namen_(Dr_Hirsch_Veilchenblau_Lindenstein)_House_signs_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_10_Jud_bleibt_Jud_(Suetterlinschrift)_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_11_Jud_bleibt_Jud_(Jude_Itzig_Ephraim_isst,_Pfarrer_Christenmann)_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_12_Der_Viehjude_(Gier_nach_Geld,_Ein_Bauer_war_in_grosser_Not)_Suetterlinschrift_No_known_co.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_13_Der_Viehjude_(Gier_nach_Geld,_Ein_Bauer_war_in_grosser_Not)_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_14_Der_Sabbat_(Am_Freitag,_zu_seinem_Jahwegott,_prangt_er_im_Zylinderhut)_Suetterlin_No_copy.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_15_Der_Sabbat_(Am_Freitag,_zu_seinem_Jahwegott,_prangt_er_im_Zylinderhut)_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_16_Aaron_Kahn_ein_Kaufhaus_er_sein_Eigen_nennt,_Gib_Brot!_Ich_hungrig_bin!_(Suetterlin)_No_k.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_17_Aaron_Kahn_ein_Kaufhaus_er_sein_Eigen_nennt,_Gib_Brot!_Ich_hungrig_bin!_(Kaufhausbesitzer.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_18_Isaak_Blumenfeld_Metzger_Ein_schmutz%27ger_Mann_(Suetterlinschrift)_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_19_Isaak_Blumenfeld_Metzger_Ein_schmutz%27ger_Mann_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_20_Der_juedische_Rechtgewalt,_beim_Judenadvokat_(Suetterlinschrift)_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_21_Der_juedische_Rechtgewalt,_beim_Judenadvokat_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_22_Das_Dienstmaedchen,_Arbeitsplatz_beim_Juden_(Suetterlinschrift)_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_23_Das_Dienstmaedchen,_Arbeitsplatz_beim_Juden_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_24_Der_Jud_mag_seine_eignen_Frauen_nicht,_deutsche_Frau_(Suetterlinschrift)_No_known_copyrig.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_25_Der_Jud_mag_seine_eignen_Frauen_nicht,_deutsche_Frau_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_26_Vater,_Tochter,_Du_aber_geht_aus_Eigennutz_zum_Juden_(Suetterlinschrift)_No_known_copyrig.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_27_Vater,_Tochter,_Du_aber_geht_aus_Eigennutz_zum_Juden_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_28_Der_juedische_Arzt,_Trau_einem_Judendoktor_nicht!_(Suetterlinschrift)_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_29_Der_juedische_Arzt,_Trau_einem_Judendoktor_nicht!_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_30_Noch_andre_Streiche_hat_der_Jud_Vollfuehrt_mit_seinem_Satansblut._Ein_Kaempfer_(Suetterli.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_31_Das_ist_der_Streicher!_(Nazi_politician_and_publisher_Julius_Streicher_with_children)_No.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_32_Streicher_hat_den_Stuermer_drucken_lassen,_seit_Jahren_kaempft_er_(Suetterlin)_No_known_c.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_33_Der_Stuermer_Gauleiter_Julius_Streicher_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_34_Ins_Judenkaufhaus_gehn_wir_nicht!_Die_Mutter_zu_dem_Kinde_spricht_(Suetterlin)_No_known_c.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_35_Ins_Judenkaufhaus_gehn_wir_nicht!_Die_Mutter_zu_dem_Kinde_spricht_(Zabulon_Levy)_No_known.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_36_Nun_wird_es_in_den_Schulen_schoen,_Denn_alle_Juden_muessen_gehn_(Suetterlin)_No_known_cop.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_37_Nun_wird_es_in_den_Schulen_schoen,_Denn_alle_Juden_muessen_gehn_(School_children)_No_know.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_38_In_unserm_weiten_Vaterland,_dass_Juden_unerwuenschet_sind!_(Suetterlinschrift)_No_known_c.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_39_In_unserm_weiten_Vaterland,_dass_Juden_unerwuenschet_sind!_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_40_Des_Fuehrers_Jugend_(Suetterlinschrift)_No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_41_Des_Fuehrers_Jugend_(Hitlerjugend_Jungvolk)_No_known_copyright_restrictions.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_42_Im_fernen_Sueden_liegt_das_Land,_wo_einst_der_Juden_Wiege_stand_(Suetterlin)_No_known_cop.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_43_Einbahnstrasse,_die_Juden_sind_unser_Unglueck_(No_known_copyright_restrictions).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_44_Stuermer-Verlag_Nuernberg_No_known_copyright_restrictions_Old.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trau_keinem_Fuchs_auf_gruener_Heid_und_keinem_Jud_bei_seinem_Eid_1936_German_Nazi_propaganda_antisemitic_children%27s_book_45_COVER_BACK_Ohne_Loesung_der_Judenfrage_keine_Erloesung_der_Menschheit_(No_known_copyright.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_A.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_B.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Rosenzweig τ 17:26, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Elvira Bauer (1915-?) - Trau keinem Fuchs auf gruener Heid und keinem Jud bei seinem Eid 1936 Trust No Fox in the Green Meadow and No Jew on his Oath German Nazi propaganda anti-Semitic children's book.pdf for the PDF file of the whole book. --Rosenzweig τ 17:27, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep It is assumed that she died in the war in Berlin, and no death certificate was issued, as was the case for a good portion of the people buried in the rubble during the Battle of Berlin, over 100,000 were killed. She does not show up in the post-war census. --RAN (talk) 00:59, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Question Where does it say that "it is assumed that she died in the war in Berlin", that "no death certificate was issued" and that "she does not show up in the post-war census"? Couldn't she have simply married and changed her name? All of this is not in any way evidence that she died before 1952. --Rosenzweig τ 07:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:21, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/"J Wegener"
[edit]This is a work of German painter and illustrator de:Jürgen Wegener (Maler, 1901), who died in 1984. The files were uploaded with a CC license, but there is none at the source. The work is still protected by copyright and should be deleted. The files can be restored in 2055.
- File:J Wegener 1926 1936 Zehnjaehrige Widerkehr des Reichsparteitages Weimar 3 4 5 Juli Offizielle Festpostkarte NSDAP Gauleitung Thueringen Deutschland Erwache Postkarte Nazi party propaganda postcard swastika standard No known copyright.jpg
- File:J Wegener 1926 1936 Zehnjaehrige Widerkehr des Reichsparteitages Weimar 3 4 5 Juli Offizielle Festpostkarte NSDAP Gauleitung Thueringen Deutschland Erwache Postkarte Nazi party propaganda postcard swastika standard etc No known copyrigh.jpg
- File:J Wegener Weimar 22-23 Okt 1938 Gautag der NSDAP Gauleitung Thüringen Offizielle Festpostkarte Postkarte Nazi party propaganda postcard Germany text side No known copyright restrictions 3201200926a.jpg
- File:J Wegener Weimar 22-23 Okt 1938 Gautag der NSDAP Thüringen Deutschland Erwache Offizielle Festpostkarte Postkarte Nazi party propaganda postcard swastika standard etc No known copyright 3201200926.jpg
Rosenzweig τ 18:19, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:20, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/1. Grosses Volksfest der Blumenstadt Erfurt
[edit]These files showing a 1936 German postcard were uploaded with a CC license, but there is none at the two sources. The artwork is signed, so it is not anonymous. A 1936 artist could well have lived beyond 1951, which would mean that the work is still protected by copyright per the usual 70 years pma formula. The file should therefore be deleted per the precautionary principle unless conclusively shown to be in the public domain or under a free license. The files can be restored with {{PD-old-assumed}} in 2057.
- File:1. Grosses Volksfest der Blumenstadt Erfurt auf dem Friedrich-Wilhelm-Platz aus Anlass des Kreistages der NSDAP 11. 12. Oktober 1936 Festpostkarte Trachten Maibaum Nazi party public festival postcard May pole etc.jpg
- File:1. Grosses Volksfest der Blumenstadt Erfurt auf dem Friedrich-Wilhelm-Platz aus Anlass des Kreistages der NSDAP 11. 12. Oktober 1936 Festpostkarte Trachten Maibaum Nazi Party public festival postcard May pole etc small.jpg
Rosenzweig τ 18:26, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:20, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
File:*+ *Bite Marks through mouth satisfaction during Oral Sex - Pictures only for Sexual Education - Injury of the Penis (Transgender) - Image documentation of a Scene Transgender Photographer - May 2019 - Picture 001.jpg
[edit]_-_Image_documentation_of_a_Scene_Transgender_Photographer_-_May_2019_-_Picture_001.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_Image_documentation_of_a_Scene_Transgender_Photographer_-_May_2019_-_Picture_001.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unclear what we’re supposed to be seeing here besides yet another COM:PENIS Dronebogus (talk) 21:09, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:20, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Eesti Õpilasmalev
[edit]Derivatives, no authors' permissions.
- File:EOM medal.jpg
- File:EOM Parus Tallina 53 keskkool.jpg
- File:EÕM embleem 83.jpg
- File:EÕM embleem Vaki.jpg
- File:EÕM Parus embleem.jpg
- File:EÕM Pärnu piirkonna parim vanemkomandör.jpg
- File:Komsomol award EÕM.jpg
- File:Pärnu EÕM embleem.jpg
Xunks (talk) 06:29, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- This is the collective work of Soviet children, exept EOM medal.jpg and Komsomol award EÕM.jpg Liilia Moroz (talk) 16:08, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. They're copyrighted nonetheless, and they're not old enough that the copyrights have expired. --Rosenzweig τ 08:41, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Illegible text and very poor quality scan, therefore unusable, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 03:28, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep and replace with a better copy when available, while the text is difficult to read, I can still read it. The images of the people, may be the only ones. --RAN (talk) 04:44, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Comment This is an image of a publication from the 1930s which describes a much earlier event. It is clearly of educational value and is therefore in scope (I am unclear on what grounds it wouldn't be in scope). The "illegible text" is readable (I have seen far worse in old manuscripts). I would like to vote keep but I am unclear on the basis for the free licence on Flikr. The Flikr site doesn't always load very well on my phone (so there may be some hidden text I missed) but I can't see any details to explain what authority the uploader on Flikr has to release the image. From Hill To Shore (talk) 15:46, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- It is out of scope because it is unusable because of its very poor quality. The text is barely legible. No point keeping this while waiting for a better version. That will likely never happen. If that even exists, it can be uploaded as a new image. Commons is not a garbage dump for every crummy image. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:28, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- It is not unusable. As RAN says above, if this is the only image of these people then it has potential to be used as the best representation of those people. If a higher quality version is uploaded then this version can be deleted. We do not wipe out historic imagery simply because it isn't perfect. From Hill To Shore (talk) 16:41, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per above. The text is not the only important part of this image. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 00:39, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Krd 10:12, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Ce portrait imaginaire de St-Paul-hors-les-Murs, représente Benoît X, qui n'est plus reconnu comme pape. Voir https://fr.dreamstime.com/photo-stock-pape-antipape-beno%C3%AEt-x-image99451244 Sumenol (talk) 13:52, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep No valid reason given for deletion.
- See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Silvestro3.jpg likewise. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:51, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- You can keep, but you will keep an ERROR. If the photo sent does not convince you, you can also go to https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html The images are indisputable, but you have to search a little (left part towards the choir). Otherwise, if you are still not convinced, you can go to St Paul outside the Walls. The error comes from the posters sold on site. As many portraits are imaginary. They did not want to leave the Sylvester III box (considered in the 19th century as an antipope) empty. They replaced that of Benedict X (then considered pope). Afterwards, you do as you want, but I will have done my job by pointing out the problem to you Sumenol (talk) 02:40, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- The image description already knows and says it's "antipope Benedict X.". No reason to delete the file. --MF-W 14:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- Comme elle n'illustre a priori aucun article, cela ne pose pas trop de problème. Mais il faudra la renommer pour qu'on ne puisse plus faire le lien avec Sylvestre III. Ce n'est pas le cas d'une autre image identique qui elle entraîne beaucoup d'erreurs sur Wikipedia. Sumenol (talk) 17:06, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- The image description already knows and says it's "antipope Benedict X.". No reason to delete the file. --MF-W 14:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- You can keep, but you will keep an ERROR. If the photo sent does not convince you, you can also go to https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html The images are indisputable, but you have to search a little (left part towards the choir). Otherwise, if you are still not convinced, you can go to St Paul outside the Walls. The error comes from the posters sold on site. As many portraits are imaginary. They did not want to leave the Sylvester III box (considered in the 19th century as an antipope) empty. They replaced that of Benedict X (then considered pope). Afterwards, you do as you want, but I will have done my job by pointing out the problem to you Sumenol (talk) 02:40, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion, in use. --Krd 10:14, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
This portrait is still widely used to represent Sylvester III while it shows Antipope Benedict X (see https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html) Sumenol (talk) 16:56, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
- Still no reason to delete it. Change the description, even rename it, but deletion is not appropriate. A representation of Benedict X is just as valid here as one of Sylvester III.
- Besides which, you've given no comprehensible evidence to support your claim. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:16, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Krd 14:11, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Andy Dingley wrote this amazing sentence to refuse the second deletion: "you've given no comprehensible evidence to support your claim". Yet what is more obvious than a photo (accessible via the link https://www.alamy.it/papa-antipapa-benedetto-x-nato-giovanni-fu-papa-dal-1058 -al-1059-la-basilica-di-san-paolo-fuori-le-mura-roma-italia-image448503796.html) showing that the falsely used portrait is that of Benedictus X (which cannot be translated as Silvestre III) . And if there is still a little doubt, this second link (https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html) allows (by searching a little) you to put the medallion back in its environment of origin.
As long as there is the slightest link on Wikipedia between Silvestre III and the image whose deletion is requested, there will be an error on Wikipedia. Wishing like everyone else that this source of information be as reliable as possible, my duty will be to have this error removed on the basis of an indisputable fact easily verifiable with the evidence that I bring.Sumenol (talk) 05:26, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
1 013 / 5 000 Résultats de traduction On Wikipedia, several images have used the medallion of Antipope Benedict X from the outset to illustrate the imaginary portrait of Silvestre III. But the latter was not considered a legitimate pope in the 19th century, when the mosaics were made at Saint Paul outside the Walls. No image represents it. The most used fake portrait was eliminated from Wikipedia a few weeks ago. But there are others including this one, which is still falsely used on several Wikipedia pages. It must be removed because it perpetuates the error. The small corrective notice written on this page is not enough. This error is indisputable. Voir : https://www.alamy.it/papa-antipapa-benedetto-x-nato-giovanni-fu-papa-dal-1058-al-1059-la-basilica-di-san-paolo-fuori-le-mura-roma-italia-image448503796.html and search at https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html Sumenol (talk) 03:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Andy Dingley wrote this amazing sentence to refuse the second deletion: "you've given no comprehensible evidence to support your claim". Yet what is more obvious than a photo (accessible via the link https://www.alamy.it/papa-antipapa-benedetto-x-nato-giovanni-fu-papa-dal-1058 -al-1059-la-basilica-di-san-paolo-fuori-le-mura-roma-italia-image448503796.html) showing that the falsely used portrait is that of Benedictus X (which cannot be translated as Silvestre III) . And if there is still a little doubt, this second link (https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html) allows (by searching a little) to replace the medallion in its original environment. As long as there is the slightest link on Wikipedia between Silvestre III and the image whose deletion is requested, there will be an error on Wikipedia. Wishing like everyone else that this source of information be as reliable as possible, my duty will be to have this error removed on the basis of an indisputable fact easily verifiable with the evidence that I bring. Sumenol (talk) 05:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Your "duty" is to start a discussion on the file's talk page and stop being disruptive by starting one deletion request after another for a file that's in use on multiple sites. It may be time to suspend your editing privileges. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:48, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Sumenol You failed to ping Andy Dingley, who also suggested that you request a rename. That is what you should have done. Brianjd (talk) 12:02, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Sumenol and Ikan Kekek: I have tagged the file {{Fact disputed}}. Brianjd (talk) 12:00, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- It took me almost a year to cancel a first link between a portrait of Silvestre III and that of Benedict X. We are touching here on a very heavy problem of form on Wikipedia, which sometimes harms the substance. I have given you all the evidence of the error. You can call me a troublemaker, threaten to punish me. But that won't change the facts. As long as there is a link between Sylvester III and the portrait, there will be an error on Wikipedia. So, maybe it's time to be constructive and break this link rather than wanting to "destroy" the one who reports the error and proves it, while not being a Wikipedia specialist like you (I see basic problems). Sumenol (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- There are those who favor construction, and others who want to destroy difference. I just read a message from a contributor who thanked me for changing the portrait of Sylvester III. Sumenol (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- You don't seem to understand that Deletion requests is not the right place to have the debate you are trying to have. Images that are in use simply do not get deleted on this kind of basis, and you will never resolve anything by continuing to try to debate facts on Deletion requests. That is why you may have to be suspended if you keep this up - it's disruptive for no useful purpose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:41, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- There are those who favor construction, and others who want to destroy difference. I just read a message from a contributor who thanked me for changing the portrait of Sylvester III. Sumenol (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- It took me almost a year to cancel a first link between a portrait of Silvestre III and that of Benedict X. We are touching here on a very heavy problem of form on Wikipedia, which sometimes harms the substance. I have given you all the evidence of the error. You can call me a troublemaker, threaten to punish me. But that won't change the facts. As long as there is a link between Sylvester III and the portrait, there will be an error on Wikipedia. So, maybe it's time to be constructive and break this link rather than wanting to "destroy" the one who reports the error and proves it, while not being a Wikipedia specialist like you (I see basic problems). Sumenol (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: As before. Please do not nominate again for the same invalid reason. --Krd 09:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Ce portrait imaginaire de St-Paul-hors-les-Murs, représente Benoît X, qui n'est plus reconnu comme pape. Voir https://fr.dreamstime.com/photo-stock-pape-antipape-beno%C3%AEt-x-image99451244 Sumenol (talk) 13:57, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep No valid reason given for deletion.
- See Commons:Deletion requests/File:146-Sylvester III.jpg likewise. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:49, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- You can keep, but you will keep an ERROR. If the photo sent does not convince you, you can also go to https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html The images are indisputable, but you have to search a little (left part towards the choir). Otherwise, if you are still not convinced, you can go to St Paul outside the Walls. The error comes from the posters sold on site. As many portraits are imaginary. They did not want to leave the Sylvester III box (considered in the 19th century as an antipope) empty. They replaced that of Benedict X (then considered pope). Afterwards, you do as you want, but I will have done my job by pointing out the problem to you. Sumenol (talk) 02:37, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- The image description already knows and says it's "antipope Benedict X.". No reason to delete the file. --MF-W 14:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but this portrait is titled Sylvester III, it illustrates Wikipedia pages on Sylvester III (among others in French) and for reasons that escape me we cannot remove this portrait from these pages. So this portrait generates many ERRORS on Wikipedia and only removing it will avoid them. As for the note on Benedict X, it was I who wrote it. Sumenol (talk) 02:56, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- Les avis sont subjectifs, les faits sont objectifs. Wikipédia repose sur des faits et des sources primaires (vérifiables sur https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html )
- Les voici :
- 1) il n'y a aucun portrait de Sylvestre III à St-Paul-hors-les-Murs, car au XIX° il est considéré comme antipape
- 2) ce portrait est celui de Benoît X (considéré à l'époque comme pape légitime). On notera que, pour absolument donner un "visage" à Sylvestre III, on utilise parfois celui de Jean XIX (XIX) -y compris sur le site vatican.va-. Donc selon les pages Wikipédia, Sylvestre III est illustré de manière différente (pour vérifier, il suffit de taper Sylvester III ou Silvester III sur un moteur de recherche).
- 3) ce portrait sert à illustrer de nombreuses pages Wikipédia consacrées à ce pape, et elles ont impossibles à enlever (voir en français, italien, ...).
- Il n'est donc pas possible, sous peine de conserver une erreur plusieurs fois reprise sur Wikipédia, de laisser la situation en l'état. Il ne faut donc plus d'une manière ou d'une autre qu'il illustre automatiquement les pages sur Sylvestre III. Si renommer la page suffit, c'est bien. Mais il faut faire au moins cela et vérifier qu'il ne peut illustrer que l'antipape Benoît X.
- Les portraits de St-Paul de cette époque sont bien sûr imaginaires, mais si on en choisit un, autant que ce soit le bon. Les anglais ont choisi de ne pas les utiliser. Sumenol (talk) 03:59, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but this portrait is titled Sylvester III, it illustrates Wikipedia pages on Sylvester III (among others in French) and for reasons that escape me we cannot remove this portrait from these pages. So this portrait generates many ERRORS on Wikipedia and only removing it will avoid them. As for the note on Benedict X, it was I who wrote it. Sumenol (talk) 02:56, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- The image description already knows and says it's "antipope Benedict X.". No reason to delete the file. --MF-W 14:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- You can keep, but you will keep an ERROR. If the photo sent does not convince you, you can also go to https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html The images are indisputable, but you have to search a little (left part towards the choir). Otherwise, if you are still not convinced, you can go to St Paul outside the Walls. The error comes from the posters sold on site. As many portraits are imaginary. They did not want to leave the Sylvester III box (considered in the 19th century as an antipope) empty. They replaced that of Benedict X (then considered pope). Afterwards, you do as you want, but I will have done my job by pointing out the problem to you. Sumenol (talk) 02:37, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion, in use. --Krd 10:14, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Miwako Sato as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Taken from this website, which says "สงวนลิขสิทธิ์ © 2547 - 2565 http://www.dmc.tv" May be old enough. Yann (talk) 21:19, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: The painting may be old, but a photo of the painting can still be subject to copyright. Now that the source (as above) says the photo is still copyrighted, it should just be deleted. --Miwako Sato (talk) 11:21, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Not is this case. See Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag. Yann (talk) 11:33, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —howcheng {chat} 18:00, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
Derivative of the modern artwork, no permission, no FoP in Estonia. Xunks (talk) 06:36, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- This is a traditional Estonian pattern dating back over a hundred years. Liilia Moroz (talk) 14:01, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. The photo is made in a shop and is showing a modern embroidery. Perhaps the embroidery is based on an old design. However, the uploader did not give sufficient evidence to show that the modern embroidery is a copy of an old design, so it is not shown that the file is in the public domain or that the copyright owner (possibly the embroiderer) has released it under a suitable licence, per COM:EVID. Therefore the file has to be deleted. If you do not agree with my decision to delete the file(s), please ask for undeletion on COM:UNDELETE. If you do so, formulate your motivation why this image (or these images) can be maintained very clearly and base your motivation on the Commons policies. After that, another administrator will take a decision.. --Ellywa (talk) 19:47, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
