Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2022/05/17
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
_in_2022.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Copyvio es 191.126.184.125 01:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, F1. --Gbawden (talk) 06:54, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleting this Poto. No es usuario, es mentiroso 191.126.184.125 01:14, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; F10. --Gbawden (talk) 06:52, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Poto pribadi, no usuario 191.126.184.125 01:16, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
F1, F10, collage, SPAM 191.126.184.125 01:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
F1, F10, collage, SPAM, junk etc. 191.126.184.125 01:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
F10 SPAM 191.126.184.125 01:19, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
SPAM, junk, F10 (no usuario, mentiroso) 191.126.184.125 01:19, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 06:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Poto pribadi, no usuario 191.126.184.125 01:15, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Gbawden at 06:51, 17 May 2022 UTC: per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bian Dinnurjand 3.jpg --Krdbot 13:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Poto pribadi 191.126.184.125 01:16, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Gbawden at 06:47, 17 May 2022 UTC: Personal photo by non-contributors (F10): Commons:Deletion requests/File:Biandinnurjand3.jpg: Poto pribadi --Krdbot 13:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Bedivere as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Unlikely own work
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:24, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 14:43, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Bedivere as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Unlikely own work
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:29, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 14:42, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Bedivere as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: De minimis does not apply in this case (closeup to probably copyrighted portrait)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:31, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 14:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Lo subí por error Kpepits 6 (talk) 09:28, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: already yesterday. --Achim55 (talk) 18:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Out-of-scope image. Pierre cb (talk) 23:34, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:33, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Personal files for speedy deletion 191.126.184.125 01:22, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 18:02, 17 May 2022 UTC: CSD F10 (personal photos out of COM:SCOPE --Krdbot 01:36, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
User request Betonklaus (talk) 01:28, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Speedy delete per COM:CSD#G7 "Author or uploader request deletion". TilmannR (talk) 12:09, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by someone else. --Rosenzweig τ 11:15, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Potential copyright violation. Uploader claims "own work" but has been cited for WP:COPYVIO before, including another edit on the album article. I imagine this should be a speedy delete but am inexperienced with the procedures and just wanna get this resolved without any trouble. QuietHere (talk) 19:48, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. F1. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 13:40, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
This (allegedly) 1960 photo showing a government building in South Vietnam is said to be a South Vietnamese government work. Is a photo showing a government building automatically that government's work? I doubt it and would like to see some evidence; else the file should be deleted per the precautionary principle. Rosenzweig τ 06:19, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: As nominated. I haven't found any information in the referenced blog entry about the source of this image. --AFBorchert (talk) 14:05, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
_in_2022.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_in_2022.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
copyright image - HERA (wow that's totally not how copyright works) Evaders99 (talk) 21:55, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
_in_2022.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: speedy deleted: clear copyvio case. --BrightRaven (talk) 13:00, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
_in_2022.jpg){kind=link}
copyright image - HERA (wow that's totally not how copyright works) Evaders99 (talk) 21:56, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, speedied as copyvio. --Túrelio (talk) 08:00, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
copyright image - JYP Entertainment https://www.koreaboo.com/news/jyp-entertainment-jypn-new-girl-group-name-leaked-trademark/ Evaders99 (talk) 22:00, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by EugeneZelenko at 21:24, 20 May 2022 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing (F1): Promo/press photo --Krdbot 01:34, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
most probably a copyvio 2A00:1FA0:84BD:FE17:7064:DB77:DFED:3576 21:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:59, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gretchenandrew (talk · contribs)
[edit]Per COM:NOTHOST an COM:NOTUSED: Artwork without obvious educational use, including non-educational artwork uploaded to showcase the artist's skills
- File:Bow New Hampshire 22.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 21.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 20.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 19.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 17.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 18.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 23.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 16.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 15.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 13.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 14.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 12.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 11.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 10.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 9.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 8.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 7.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 6.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 3.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 5.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 4.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 1.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire.jpg
- File:Bow New Hampshire 2.jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (2).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (4).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (6).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (5).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (9).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (7).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (10).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (8).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (3).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (14).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (13).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (11).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman.jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (1).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (15).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (17).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (25).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (18).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (200).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (28).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (27).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (24).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (16).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (21).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (23).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (29).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (20).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (26).jpg
- File:29-year-old-woman (22).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (ac).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (aa).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (ab).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (z).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (y).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (x).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (w).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (v).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (u).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (t).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (s).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (r).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (o).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (q).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (p).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (l).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (n).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (m).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (k).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (i).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (j).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (h).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (f).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (g).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (d).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (e).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (c).jpg
- File:29 year old woman (a).jpg
- File:29 year old woman.jpg
- File:29 year old woman (b).jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Takeaway (talk) 08:01, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 03:20, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gretchenandrew (talk · contribs) 2
[edit]You cannot just screenshot something and upload it as CC BY-SA, because you are creating a derivative work of the stuff you screenshot, and you have to clear the copyright in that as well. The search engine screenshots infringe the copyright in image thumbnails shown, and also in Windows / the browser. The Wikimedia screenshots do not properly attribute the MediaWiki software or the screenshotted pages and images; if any of the images is non-free then the screenshot is a copyvio.
- File:Gretchen Andrew Search Engine Art & Internet Imperialism Results, Bow NH.png
- File:Gretchen Andrew Search Engine Art & Internet Imperialism Results.png
- File:Wikimedia-girl.png
- File:Wikimedia deletion.png
BethNaught (talk) 00:15, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
BethNaught I understand now and am happy to execute these deletions but not sure how to. Any clear instructions are very welcomeGretchenandrew (talk) 18:06, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Gretchenandrew: Please read COM:DP. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 02:03, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Delete per nom, COM:OOS copyvio screenshots. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 02:03, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, uploader agreed to deletion. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 17:19, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gretchenandrew (talk · contribs) 3
[edit]Self-created artwork without obvious educational uses, out of COM:SCOPE. See Commons:Project scope/Summary. Also: COM:NOTHOST an COM:NOTUSED.
- File:Perfect-female-body-15.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-14.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-13.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-12.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-11.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-10.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-9.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-8.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-7.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-6.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-4.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-5.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-1.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-3.jpg
- File:Perfect-female-body-2.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-17.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-18.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-16.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-15.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-14.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-13.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-12.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-11.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-10.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-8.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-9.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-7.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-6.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-5.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-4.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-2.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-3.jpg
- File:Powerful-person-1.jpg
- File:Female-conception-14.jpg
- File:Female-conception-13.jpg
- File:Female-conception-12.jpg
- File:Female-conception-11.jpg
- File:Female-conception-10.jpg
- File:Female-conception-9.jpg
- File:Female-conception-8.jpg
- File:Female-conception-7.jpg
- File:Female-conception-4.jpg
- File:Female-conception-5.jpg
- File:Female-conception-1.jpg
- File:Female-conception-2.jpg
- File:Female-conception-3.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer 13.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer 12.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer 11.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer 10.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer 9.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer 8.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer 7.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer 6.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer 5.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer 4.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer 3.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer 2.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer.jpg
- File:Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer 1.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-48.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-47.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-46.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-44.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-45.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-43.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-42.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-41.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-39.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-40.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-38.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-37.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-36.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-35.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-33.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-34.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-30.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-32.jpg
- File:Bow-new-hampshire-31.jpg
- File:Displacement-8.jpg
- File:Displacement-9.jpg
- File:Displacement-7.jpg
- File:Displacement-3.jpg
- File:Displacement-6.jpg
- File:Displacement-4.jpg
- File:Displacement-5.jpg
- File:Displacement-2.jpg
- File:Displacement-1.jpg
- File:Displacement-0.jpg
Steinsplitter (talk) 14:24, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
- Hello Steinsplitter I disagree with these deletions. Please see the on going discussion on Village Pump in regards to art and educational value, in particularly in regards to the supremacy of photography and the role of image in the education of intelligent machines. It is currently being argued that art is not removed for the scope reason you listed.
@Yann: @Jeff G: @Colin: @Christian Ferrer: @Dvdgmz: @Seeeko: @Donald Trung: @Ruthven: He is an example of work being flagged for removal NOT because of poor quality, poor categorization but because it is not photography. Gretchenandrew (talk) 14:54, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
- Citing from COM:PS: "Artwork without obvious educational use, including non-educational artwork uploaded to showcase the artist's skills". Imho this is a (personal) artwork without obvious educational use. It is your personal art as fare i can see. I did not read the linked discussion/proposal[sic.] yet because tons of text, however the policy has not changed yet (and likely there is no consensus to do so, i fail to see a poll). Best. --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:04, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Childish art, poor quality. No educational use. Any art reproduction smaller than 2 Mpx is of poor quality. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:39, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and Yann as COM:OOS. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:37, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
It's a fun coincidence for Yann to call my work childish as I spent 5 years training with Billy Childish. I've shown work with The V&A Museum and the Metropolitan Museum of Art. I am managed by Stefan Simchowitz. Assuming their opinons on work quality are at least equally valid, let's set aside "childish" as not a valid reason for removal. Poor quality re: image size is interesting. This seems like a rule of thumb but I can believe it is documented somewhere as a guideline. I'd like to read up on this. These images were intentionally sized to the maximum size required to convey the necessary information. Smaller image size is very important to communities, users, and geographies for whom unlimited high speed data is not a given. These images are as large as they need to be. This leaves us with the question of "educationally useful." Can we agree this is the point of contention and reason for deletion alone? If so, happy to respond in depth about that. Steinsplitter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gretchenandrew (talk • contribs) 05:29, 13 February 2018 (UTC) Now signed: Gretchenandrew (talk) 16:35, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
- Signing your posts on talk pages is required and it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and a timestamp will then automatically be added when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 06:09, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Gretchenandrew: Re the size issue, please read COM:FTSS. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 06:09, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Jeff, thanks for the article on COM:FTSS. Interesting information but I don't see where it says anything like, "Any art reproduction smaller than 2 Mpx is of poor quality." But I am happy to exchange these images for .png of higher quality if we can agree that will allow them to remain on the site? Thoughts Yann?Gretchenandrew (talk) 16:35, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Though I have not yet heard from Steinsplitter as to whether or not we can agree on "educationally useful" as the point of contention here is why, by category, I believe these images to be so:
Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer files - These paintings are about me and my family’s experience of my mom’s ongoing struggle with Malignant epithelial ovarian cancer. Just as battles are not just defined by tactical maps, we are not educated about disease only by what is seen under a telescope. What is cancer? Is it a set of medical diagrams? There is educational value in the humanizing the experience. Is it possible that doctors and researchers studying the disease could learn from a more intricately expressed understanding of how one family has responded to the disease and its treatment? Is it possible that other patients and their families, having just been diagnosed with the disease and turning to the internet, could find educational value in artwork that speaks to their experience? Here art’s educational role is to share experience and to humanise.
Bow New Hampshire files - What is a place? Why is a historic photo depicting a possibly unrepresentative structure more educationally useful than an artistically rendered depiction of the interior of a structure? Each are of a place and time, each show a narrow perspective, each tell a story, each have a point of view. If you’ve never been to Bow, New Hampshire what is the best way to educate you on it as a place? Here art’s educational value is to remind us that life in a particular place is lived by individuals with individual lives that are nonetheless deeply defined by the place itself.
Perfect Female Body files - The female body rendered in photographic or diagram form has a long history of the male gaze, the act of depicting the world and women in the visual arts and literature from a masculine and heterosexual point of view, presenting women as objects of male pleasure. The female body as depicted from the female point of view has educational value in both a competitive and individual sense. The internet and its imagery are important modes of cultural cues and information for those growing up today. Allowing art into this conversation, into the definition, expands the educational value of images, all of which should be read with consideration to who made them and for what purpose.
Female Conception files - The act of conception is very often misrepresented as an active male sperm penetrating a passive egg. As the egg exert a pulling force this is scientifically untrue. Here is a perfect example how a seemingly innocuous scientific diagram can perpetuate a discriminatory world view. All images, event photography even diagrams, contain bias and perspective. In acknowledging this Wikimedia can see a clearer path to allowing non-photographic images to exist as equals on the site. The act of conception is everywhere plagued by this misunderstanding that perpetuates serytoes and limiting gender roles. These images are about conception, portraying women as equal partners in the biological process.
Powerful person files - Artificial intelligence is in the process of using wikipedia and search results more broadly to learn to identify and make decisions based on images and their associated words. To limit “power” to white men and political figures is to narrow an important concept to a western ideal. Here the works are educationally useful to the education of intelligent machines which are learning to identify what power is based on existing content. It should be noted that in all of these cases the argument of how intelligent machines are using wikipedia to receive their education is relevant.
Displacement files - The dictionary definition of displacement is, “the moving of something from its place or position.” In scientific terms displacement is the measuring of volume through submerging an object in a fluid. In human terms our time continues to see the movement of displaced persons. Within Freudian psychology displacement is an unconscious defense mechanism whereby the mind substitutes either a new aim or a new object for goals felt in their original form to be dangerous or unacceptable. In all its definitions there are questions of scales and pressures alongside an implied feeling of a vanished the initial state. Displacement is something different to the scientist, the refugee, the psychologist and the artist. Because displacement has many overlapping definitions used by specialized communities it is an especially important word to be represented by art. The artist’s unique role is to operate between the structures of language, in gaps not covered by its various uses and definitions.
In summary - Part of art’s educational role is to add humanity and experience into the understanding of what is something is or can be, the offering of an intentionally personal experience into the universal. Might these works be considered just as educationally useful as a lot of armature photography allowed on the site? And possibly might they fulfill a knowledge gap that is distinctively difficult to span with text and photography?
This is not about free hosting or self promotion. The required labor of categorization differentiates these image and their context from sites like DeviantArt and Flickr. These images, as more as any others on the site, have been intentionally added for their educational value to both people and artificially intelligent machines.
I argue these images are educationally useful and should be allowed to remain. Gretchenandrew (talk) 16:35, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Keep I think you are onto something here. Specifically, this paragraph:
In summary - Part of art’s educational role is to add humanity and experience into the understanding of what is something is or can be, the offering of an intentionally personal experience into the universal. Might these works be considered just as educationally useful as a lot of [amateur] photography allowed on the site? And possibly might they fulfill a knowledge gap that is distinctively difficult to span with text and photography?
- And this one from your proposal at the village pump:
Considering art's unique role in education, how do we make space for paintings, drawings, [and] non-photographic interpretations of what words mean within wikimedia? One suggestion would be to remove “Artwork without obvious educational use, including non-educational artwork uploaded to showcase the artist's skills” as an example of something that is not in scope and allow artwork to be removed on other grounds.
- The policy you are disputing comes from here: COM:EDUSE and COM:NOTUSED, where "educational" is very broadly defined there as "providing knowledge; instructional or informative". By that intentionally broad definition it is hard to argue that your images are not educational - and to that point you provided some non-traditional, but completely valid, explanations of their educational value (if not instructional, then informative knowledge) above.
- I think you start to run into trouble because, with this view, it is hard to see how the example "artwork without obvious educational use, including non-educational artwork uploaded to showcase the artist's skills" would apply to any seriously considered artwork, regardless of the subjective opinion of the artists' skills, as long as there was a reasonable instructional or informative educational rational for the image in question. It is important to recognize (and justify) that by proposing the removal of that example from the policy page you are (not inappropriately) suggesting a fairly radical change to Commons policy compared to how most people have interpreted the policy historically. I think some editors are concerned the change could lead to a large increase in the number of images hosted on the commons, but I don't think that concern is a fair reason to dismiss your proposed change.
- Unfortunately, I'm not very active on the Wikimedia Commons, and so I'm not able to point to any other specific policies or guidelines that support this view. However, based on this rationale, and assuming you have a reasonable educational explanation for each image, I think these images should be kept on the Commons and accordingly the example in question should be removed or changed to better reflect the potential educational value of non-photographic images when explained appropriately. Cheers. ~ PaulC/T+ 05:56, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Deleted, no educational value. Taivo (talk) 17:06, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gretchenandrew (talk · contribs) 4
[edit]Self-created artwork without obvious educational uses, out of COM:SCOPE. See Commons:Project scope/Summary. Also: COM:NOTHOST an COM:NOTUSED. See also pervious deletion requests.
- File:What-is-ubuntu (13).jpg
- File:What-is-ubuntu (12).jpg
- File:What-is-ubuntu (10).jpg
- File:What-is-ubuntu (11).jpg
- File:What-is-ubuntu (9).jpg
- File:What-is-ubuntu (8).jpg
- File:What-is-ubuntu (7).jpg
- File:What-is-ubuntu (6).jpg
- File:What-is-ubuntu (5).jpg
- File:What-is-ubuntu (4).jpg
- File:What-is-ubuntu (1).jpg
- File:What-is-ubuntu (2).jpg
- File:What-is-ubuntu (3).jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Steinsplitter (talk) 12:07, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, OOS. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:46, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:47, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Note - All files restored, as [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?diff=320069475&oldid=320066098 they are now on scope.-- Darwin Ahoy! 13:54, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gretchenandrew (talk · contribs) 5
[edit]Thirteen versions of the same text logo with different border sizes, none of them in use.
- File:Art-basel-nft-18.jpg
- File:Art-basel-nft-17.jpg
- File:Art-basel-nft-16.jpg
- File:Art-basel-nft-15.jpg
- File:Art-basel-nft-14.jpg
- File:Art-basel-nft-13.jpg
- File:Art-basel-nft-12.jpg
- File:Art-basel-nft-11.jpg
- File:Art-basel-nft-10.jpg
- File:Art-basel-nft-9.jpg
- File:Art-basel-nft-8.jpg
- File:Art-basel-nft-6.jpg
- File:Art-basel-nft-7.jpg
Lord Belbury (talk) 11:49, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
{{Vk}} File:Art-basel-nft-11.jpg as the best and Delete the restall per nom as oos. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 11:59, 16 May 2022 (UTC) edited 16:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)- Keep notorious artist donating content to Wikimedia projects. --Joalpe (talk) 13:06, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- These are thirteen copies of the same text image, with the same identical summary description ("Art Basel NFT"), that differ only in their border widths. There is no explanation of their purpose, none of them are in use, and it's not even clear that they're meant to be 13 distinct artworks. If an artist uploaded a portrait with 13 different border widths, or 100, or 2000, would Commons always keep all of them? --Lord Belbury (talk) 13:32, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Lord Belbury: Is that a !vote? — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:48, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry, that was intended as a response to the point that the images were all usefully donated art. No objection to Jeff's suggestion to keep one of them, although it would be nice to know what the image is actually meant to be. Is it an artwork called "Art Basel NFT", is it an NFT, is it a logo for a show, etc. --Lord Belbury (talk) 15:53, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Lord Belbury: Thanks. It would be a real shame if file 11 was what she was trying to sell as an NFT. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:58, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry, that was intended as a response to the point that the images were all usefully donated art. No objection to Jeff's suggestion to keep one of them, although it would be nice to know what the image is actually meant to be. Is it an artwork called "Art Basel NFT", is it an NFT, is it a logo for a show, etc. --Lord Belbury (talk) 15:53, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Lord Belbury: Is that a !vote? — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:48, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- These are thirteen copies of the same text image, with the same identical summary description ("Art Basel NFT"), that differ only in their border widths. There is no explanation of their purpose, none of them are in use, and it's not even clear that they're meant to be 13 distinct artworks. If an artist uploaded a portrait with 13 different border widths, or 100, or 2000, would Commons always keep all of them? --Lord Belbury (talk) 13:32, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom. and Jeff. Yann (talk) 14:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:03, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gretchenandrew (talk · contribs) 6
[edit]Derivative works. See one of the source at Getty Images.
- File:Contemporary-art-auction-record-29.jpg
- File:Contemporary-art-auction-record-28.jpg
- File:Contemporary-art-auction-record-27.jpg
- File:Contemporary-art-auction-record-25.jpg
- File:Contemporary-art-auction-record-5.jpg
- File:Contemporary-art-auction-record-6.jpg
- File:Contemporary-art-auction-record-4.jpg
- File:Contemporary-art-auction-record-1.jpg
- File:Contemporary-art-auction-record-3.jpg
- File:Contemporary-art-auction-record-2.jpg
Yann (talk) 14:30, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:46, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:05, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
advert, no encyclopaedic value Tagishsimon (talk) 09:16, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:06, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Webster Dictionary101 (talk · contribs)
[edit]SD|F10 (personal photos by non-contributors)
JopkeB (talk) 11:44, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:06, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by الممثل زكريا عبدالرحيم (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal photo for non-wikipedian: Out of scope
--Alaa :)..! 12:55, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by JohnMackerz (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal photo for non-wikipedian: Out of scope
--Alaa :)..! 12:55, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo, no educational value, out of scope. And above COM:TOO. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:09, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jundception (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused logo and org chart, no educational value, out of scope.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:08, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Unused photo of non-notable group, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:06, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:09, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Unused math equation, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:06, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:09, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Personal essay, raw text, out of scope. Achim55 (talk) 18:09, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Biggd123456 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused DW of non-notable person, no educational value, out of scope.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:13, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:11, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Unused photo of non-notable persons, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:25, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:11, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Not a map of a real election, so out of scope. Elli (talk) 18:30, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:13, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Use for Self-promotion at en.wikipedia.com. Rastinition (talk) 22:11, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:14, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Use for Self-promotion at en.wikipedia.com. Rastinition (talk) 22:11, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 15:14, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Omnibot
[edit]Per COM:TOYS
- File:EarlyRobot.jpg
- File:I-SOBOT-Wikipedia.jpg
- File:Invasion! (4141370417).jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000 (5900602090).jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170188-black.jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170188-gradient.jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170188-white.jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170189-black.jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170189-gradient.jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170189-white.jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170191-black.jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170191-gradient.jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170191-white.jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170193.jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170194.jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170195-black.jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170195-gradient.jpg
- File:Omnibot 2000-P3170195-white.jpg
- File:Omnibot deck.jpg
- File:Robot I Used in 8th Grade - Omnibot 2000.jpg
- File:TOMY Omnibot 2000 (1985) - Computer History Museum.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_Computer_History_Museum.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
— Racconish 💬 13:17, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 14:31, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Low quality chemical structure due to incorrect file format, replaced by File:CNQX.svg. Nucleus hydro elemon (talk) 15:11, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 19:38, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Leyo 08:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Yuri Husskov (talk · contribs)
[edit]Apparent NETCOPYVIOs - primarily low res with no camera EXIF, elsewhere before upload (e.g., File:Aimustafa3.jpg is here; File:ViaducAT.jpg is here; File:AinElKebira.jpg is here; File:Elmokrani4.jpg is here; File:Oued-Rekham.jpg is here; File:BeniFouda2.jpg is here; etc.), uploader signifciant history of copyvios, etc. Duck/PRP
- File:VuePanoGlaciere.jpg
- File:VuePanoLaGlaciere.jpg
- File:BeniFouda2.jpg
- File:MosqueeDehamcha.jpg
- File:AinElKebira.jpg
- File:KhezrMountain.jpg
- File:Mostafameraji.jpg
- File:QomCity.jpg
- File:QomCity2.jpg
- File:Aimustafa3.jpg
- File:Soukelkhemis.jpg
- File:Elmokrani6.jpg
- File:Elmokrani5.jpg
- File:Elmokrani2.jpg
- File:Elmokrani4.jpg
- File:Ainchriki.jpg
- File:Herchaoua.jpg
- File:Cascadeichi.jpg
- File:Oued-Rekham.jpg
- File:ViaducAT.jpg
- File:MosquéeDjeb.jpg
- File:Aomar.jpg
- File:Bounettah.jpg
- File:Bounettah2.jpg
- File:Plagereghaia.jpg
- File:Stadeglaciere.jpg
- File:Marchéglaciere.jpg
- File:TramLaglaciere.jpg
- File:LaGlaciereBennabi2.jpg
- File:LaGlaciereBennabi.jpg
- File:LaGlaciere3.jpg
- File:LaGlaciereEnnasr.jpg
- File:LaGlaciere2.jpg
- File:Bachdjerrah3.jpg
- File:LaGlaciere1.jpg
- File:Stadenarbr.jpg
- File:Aissatmustapha.jpg
- File:Mosqueeelfath2.jpg
- File:Aït Laziz, Bouira Province (Algeria).jpg
- File:Aït Laziz (Algeria).jpg
- File:Lesiris.jpg
- File:CitéElOuancharis.jpg
- File:LaGlaciere.jpg
- File:MosqueeMer&Soleil.jpg
- File:StadeDesFrèresZioui.jpg
- File:DairaHusseinDey.jpg
- File:Djebahia1.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Эlcobbola talk 15:48, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 14:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by ដេតសុវណ្ណ1987 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Doubtful own work. Varying sizes. Socking as well.
- File:ស្តាត RSN ភ្នំពេញក្រោន FC.jpg
- File:Dy Saveth win the miss 1959.jpg
- File:Dy Saveth.jpg
- File:Angkor sculpture Devata gods 21 door gates.jpg
- File:Monks throw the water glory in 17 April day.jpg
- File:Buddha washing in Leungsak Day.jpg
- File:Khmer New Year Devata Sangkran Prayer Offerings.jpg
- File:Khmer New Year play powder 2007.jpg
- File:Kirinei Devi.jpg
--Minorax«¦talk¦» 16:16, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 14:34, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio es 191.126.184.125 01:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:33, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Is own ? 191.126.184.125 01:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 09:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Grave of Igor Dmitriev
[edit]Derivative of the non-free artwork, no FoP in Russia except architecture.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Xunks (talk) 05:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:38, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
i'm having second thoughts of putting live audio on commons despite being cc. i'm not sure sure if live music would technically count as copyright as opposed to an offical recording, 웃OO 05:36, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 09:44, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Uploader claims this logo was created on 19 May 1901; however, according to SportsLogos.net, it was created in 1993: https://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/921/youngstown_state_penguins/. Public domain license would not apply for a 1993 work. IagoQnsi (talk) 05:53, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- What's more, Youngstown State University wasn't even founded until 1908. The 1901 date seems definitively wrong. –IagoQnsi (talk) 05:56, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 09:45, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bookish Worm (talk · contribs)
[edit]No cc license found on YouTube.
- File:关晓彤 02.png
- File:关晓彤 01.png
- File:关晓彤 03.png
- File:Guan Xiaotong 01.png
- File:Guan Xiaotong 02.png
- File:Guan Xiaotong 03.png
Larryasou (talk) 06:11, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:55, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bookish Worm (talk · contribs)
[edit]Not a work by Mehr News Agency. Some of these files are credited to leader.ir, which unlike khamenei.ir, does not publish under a free Creative Commons license. Please provide the original khamenei.ir links, if applicable, in order for these files to be reviewed.
- File:Putin-Raisi (2022-07-19).jpg → kremlin.ru credit: "Information Bureau of the Supreme Leader of Iran"
- File:Putin meeting with Iranian leaders (2022-07-19).jpg
- File:Putin-Khamenei meeting (2022-07-19) 2.jpg
- File:Vladimir Putin (2022-07-19).jpg
- File:Putin-Khamenei meeting (2022-07-19).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
HeminKurdistan (talk) 10:57, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- Does the website say that when Mehr News Agency acquires images from third parties, their contract does not allow them to release the images under a CC license? The only thing I see is: "All Content by Mehr News Agency is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License." We have a similar situation with Associated Press, they acquire images from their subscribing newspaper photographers. --RAN (talk) 03:52, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) The footer says "All Content by Mehr News Agency is licensed..." and material obtained from leader.ir (copyrighted) are not included. Files from Associated Press are protected unless proven otherwise. A similar case may be Voice of America, whose files are free. We upload files published by VOA with cautious, because like Mehr News Agency, they tend to use files from elsewhere and sometimes they omit proper credit (please see warning message at Template:PD-USGov-VOA). HeminKurdistan (talk) 16:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- Do you have more details of the Mehr News Agency contracts? As I said the Associated Press news agency holds the copyrights when subscribing newspapers contribute their images. This is more about contract law. --RAN (talk) 16:50, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Copyright violation of Google Street View imagery at [1]. When clicking on the link, the August 2011 imagery of this area represented by the uploaded image shows that there is a blue car exiting the highway, as well as two other cars travelling in the other direction, which I was able to reproduce using that link. Google does not allow the use of Street View images for commercial purposes without permission. Hx7 (talk) 06:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 09:57, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
unscharfes Foto, - auf Wunsch des Hochladenden Pimpinellus((D)) • WikiMUC • 07:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 11:11, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
per COM:DW Magnus (talk) 08:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 11:29, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This is a 1959 newspaper clipping and so is likely to still be protected by copyright as it was published less than 70 years ago. It was uploaded as own work, which is probably incorrect as this is a derivative work. TSventon (talk) 08:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 11:50, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Copy vio from http://istzapdviny.ru/books/ZYR_VII.html#razd4 this site 185.145.125.168 08:33, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 11:51, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Identical to his photo here - https://www.scdiscoveries.com/about/ - unlikely to be own work Gbawden (talk) 08:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 11:54, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Kitrsjlhf (talk) 08:58, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 11:58, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Jag laddade upp den av misstag IngimarE (talk) 09:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 12:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Jag laddade upp den av misstag IngimarE (talk) 09:13, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 12:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by C.Suthorn as Fair use (Fair use) Yann (talk) 09:25, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and COM:FOP US. Should not have been speedily deleted. See also COM:VPC#File:Fremont lenin.jpg Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fremont lenin.jpg. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:06, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fremont lenin.jpg. Yann (talk) 14:34, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per the other DR: Statue still copyrighted; no FOP; and even though the statue is in the background here, it is still a vital part of the whole thing (i.e. de minimis does not apply either). El Grafo (talk) 08:46, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 12:19, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo, VRT permission needed. MKFI (talk) 10:15, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 14:01, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighted book cover. Uploader is likely the author, but VRT permission is needed to verify copyright. MKFI (talk) 10:23, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 14:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
File EXIF shows "Author FAANGSTUDIOS Copyright holder ANGELS". VRT permission needed. MKFI (talk) 10:24, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused personal photo by non-contributor/F10. --Wdwd (talk) 14:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Unused personal or promotional document, COM:WEBHOST, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Alaa :)..! 14:12, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by CentreLeftRight as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Source given says the image is from Getty Images, which manages the distribution of high quality reconstructions of this photo along with Bettmann (of the source given). The photo on Getty Images has the exact same caption. Getty Images and Bettmann own the copyright to this reconstruction and it is not available under a free license. |source=https://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/news-photo/russian-communist-revolutionary-leader-vladimir-lenin-news-photo/515384712?adppopup=true
.jpg){kind=link}
Does {{PD-RusEmpire}} apply? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:36, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Go ahead and delete a great photo I will use another commons photo of Lenin in the wiki page that centerleft and the sock puppets keep removing sourced content from.Foorgood (talk) 03:09, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- What are you even talking about? Dronebogus (talk) 21:51, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
- Go ahead and delete a great photo I will use another commons photo of Lenin in the wiki page that centerleft and the sock puppets keep removing sourced content from.Foorgood (talk) 03:09, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Small duplicate of File:Lenin halka hitap ederken.jpg. --Yann (talk) 21:37, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Túrelio as no permission (No permission since). COM:TOO? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:00, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Kept: PD-shape. --Yann (talk) 21:41, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Copyright Abusing: It's not public license for uploader to claim own work 호로조 (talk) 06:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo, in use. --Yann (talk) 21:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Tartan357 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://barnetteforsenate.com/about/
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:32, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Comment Please see Special:Permalink/656679444#File:Kathy Barnette (candidate).png for previous discussion. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:35, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- @King of Hearts: Keep That was in error. The full file contains a watermark with the license. See File:Kathy Barnette headshot.jpg, which I reuploaded. The watermark is present in the original version on her website. I'm tagging this one as an extracted image. ― Tartan357 Talk 07:36, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Delete The image is cropped from one that appears at https://barnetteforsenate.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Kathy_Barnette_Headshot.jpg with a watermark CC-BY-SA. However, no photographer is named. Since the license requires that the photographer be named, any use here or elsewhere is a violation of the license. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:30, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- An organization can own a copyright. It's possible to purchase the full rights from the photographer, which would then allow them to relicense it in any way. The fact that this is the only photo on her website with that watermark seems to indicate attention to this. If they do not own the rights, the photographer needs to take it up with the campaign. ― Tartan357 Talk 03:50, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- It is certainly true that an organization can own a copyright. However, the usual practice would be for the photographer to license the image for use in the subject's campaign. That does not give the campaign organization the right to freely license the image.
- The question of who owns the copyright is actually irrelevant. The CC-BY-SA license requires the actual photographer to be credited. It is a violation of the license if that is not done. Since we do not not know who the photographer was, we cannot give credit and therefore cannot keep the image without violating the license. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:21, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- Actually it doesn't: the licensee is only required to "retain the following", including "identification of the creator(s) of the Licensed Material and any others designated to receive attribution", "if it is supplied by the Licensor with the Licensed Material". So we don't know what arrangement the campaign has with the photographer, and whether that arrangement requires attribution of the photographer. For instance, if it's a full buyout of the copyright, then there is no requirement that the creator be attributed, if the copyright holder does not require it. For big corporations like LG (File:LG 시네마 3D TV 새 모델 ‘소녀시대’ 영입.jpg) we generally assume good faith without a second thought. The question here is whether the same good faith should be extended to a political campaign. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:14, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Kept: CC at source. --Yann (talk) 21:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
VRT-permission from copyright holder inikep/123RF is needed. Taivo (talk) 10:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Kept: inikep/123RF is a software. --Yann (talk) 21:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Copied from https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/pics-of-taj-mahal-rooms-emerge-amid-row-over-locked-doors-2982909 and I see no evidence they are free to use Doug Weller (talk) 10:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Not a free file PurpleBuffalo (talk) 10:54, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Copyfrauded version of Sag A*.jpg as "own work"! Ras67 (talk) 11:14, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:49, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Recently uploaded. Redundant to File:Oneworld logo.svg. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 13:42, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Original author and uploader requests deletion, because this image is useless. FoolPiasar ⭐ talk 13:58, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Original author and uploader requests deletion, because this image is useless. FoolPiasar ⭐ talk 13:58, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Either COM:DERIV as a filtered screenshot from the videogame Roblox, or COM:FANART of same. Lord Belbury (talk) 14:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
실수로 업로드했습니다 철알못 버알못 (talk) 14:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --Yann (talk) 21:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Last remaining image, no metadata, user with a bad history, unlikely to be own work. Yann (talk) 14:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- <xenophobic personal attack removed>. I have given enough proof that this image is mine. "User with a bad history" is systemic discrimination of local and regional and ground-level editors. The power of admin and high-level editors should be decreased and be scrutinised for every action they take. I demand you to remove the deletion tag for this image. Debjyoti Gorai (talk) 14:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:28, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The coat of arms of the commune of Les Alluets-le-Roi actually does use the fake coat of arms. Heraldrist (talk) 15:00, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 21:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
I uploaded it by mistake அமுதவளன் ஞானாதிக்கம் (talk) 15:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:54, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
looks awfully blurry, can't make up anything important in that image, probably of no use Nutshinou Talk! 15:40, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Privacy reasons: photo of me was uploaded without permission by another under the name "Graham West" which isnt even me 2A00:23C7:9F05:7600:D055:A22B:37B5:4ABB 15:58, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
badly scaled attempt at uploading File:South Africa-Regions map NL.svg, essentially a duplicate. Unused. Enyavar (talk) 16:07, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Unused, superseded by SVG. – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 16:17, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
not in the public domain in the US as required by COM:PD, COM:DIU applies to files uploaded before Golan v. Holder Hekerui (talk) 16:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per: Commons:Massive restoration of deleted images by the URAA, closed as: "URAA cannot be used as the sole reason for deletion"); also per DR: Files uploaded by Fma12, and this DR about PD-AR-Photo files, which referred to files upload after - Fma12 (talk) 20:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- This is copywritten in the US, I see no denial. Read the statement of the legal team. You don't move stuff into the public domain by picking a few bizarre closes. You uploaded everything after the URAA discussion, the discussion was on keeping earlier stuff uploaded in good faith. Hekerui (talk) 10:34, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per reason stated above by Fma12. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 01:27, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- Have you read the legal team's statement? Copyright is not out of the window because of wishes it were. Hekerui (talk) 10:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Kept: as per above. --Yann (talk) 21:56, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Request from the subject via VRTS (Ticket#2022051710006153). Unknow person, useless for Wikipedia JohnNewton8 (talk) 16:58, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:56, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Unidentified spreadsheet CoffeeEngineer (talk) 17:19, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:56, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Unidentified logo CoffeeEngineer (talk) 17:21, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation as released previously under an incompatible license at https://fouit.gr/2022/04/25/efyge-apo-ti-zoi-i-kastoriani-zografos-tzeni-papapanteli-tsimpiskaki-eikones/ Mcmatter (talk) 17:46, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- This photograph has been released by the artist's family due to her unfortunate demise on Good Friday 2022.
- It is meant to be used in public and online. Tsber1979 (talk) 17:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Akhilbhargava (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused text docs and tables, should be in wiki-table format if needed, out of scope. And likely not own work but scans or screenshots, unclear copyright status.
- File:Table C9orf91.png
- File:Charge Clusters C9orf91.png
- File:C9orf91 Softberry Snippet(1).png
- File:C9orf91 Softberry Snippet.png
- File:C9orf91 Softberry.pdf
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:59, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Unused logos and promotional corporate images, COM:WEBHOST, no educational value, out of scope. And not own works, FB and transmission code in EXIF data.
- File:Playmobil Cumbia.jpg
- File:Logo CUP EMPRENDE final-01.jpg
- File:Logo CUP INNOVA.jpg
- File:Logo CUP PROMUEVE.jpg
- File:Estudio de radio CUP.jpg
- File:CUP Rondeau.jpg
- File:CUP INNOVA .jpg
- File:Cup Emprende.jpg
- File:CUP Promueve.jpg
P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:08, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:58, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Double picture, I am sorry, it was my mistake. See Eila Pehkonen 1969 B.jpg that I converted from original tif (Finna). -raid5 (talk) 18:08, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:58, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Likely not own work: low-res/web-sized screengrab image with FB code in EXIF data, credit in EXIF data not matching the uploader. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:58, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Unused duplicate logos with font likely above COM:TOO.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:58, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Duplicate of a better quality image. VileGecko (talk) 18:13, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Is user:Steinberglove the same as Amy Steinberg? Needs COM:OTRS. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:17, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:13, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:34, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal photo. Animalparty (talk) 00:15, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
- Delete and protect please: Per nom and too generic filename, that may be confused with WMF or MediaWiki. --Amitie 10g (talk) 02:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Again, out of scope -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 18:49, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Likely not own work: FB code in EXIF data. Needs COM:VRT. And if deleted, I suggest to COM:SALT this common filename. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:23, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
File:Gabriel conejo jolivet, Guillermo Zorro Salinas, Gustavo Perez, Rudy Marcolongo, Sebastian Peycere.jpg
[edit]
Scanned photo, missing essential info: original author, source, date, and permission. And not notable, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:26, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:03, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
source = pogorze.solectwo.pl; lack of permission. It is not "simply" logo. Sławek Borewicz (talk) 18:56, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:00, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Complex logos can be in Commons only with VRT-permission. Taivo (talk) 19:22, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Likely not own works: low-res/web-sized screengrab images with disparate quality and styles, missing EXIF data.
- File:Taman-Patung-Taman-Bambu-Ecoartpark-300x150.jpg
- File:Jungleland-300x199.jpg
- File:Air-Terjun-Bidadari-300x200.jpg
- File:Pasar-Ah-Poong.jpg
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:03, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
In the author section it currently says that it was found on the internet. Sahaib (talk) 20:26, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
14 kb, no metadata. probably copyright violation. Xocolatl (talk) 20:31, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete All other images by the uploader also seem to be copyright violations and should be deleted as well ---Hangman'sDeath (talk) 05:51, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
This file is a copyright violation as the uploader claimed this is their own work when it is clearly not their own work. No permission. YoungForever (talk) 20:32, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
copyright violation? Xocolatl (talk) 20:33, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
copyright violation? Xocolatl (talk) 20:35, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Out-of-focus photo of out-of-scope suject. Pierre cb (talk) 23:35, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- In scope. What makes you think a photo of a building is out of scope? But a terrible photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:27, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Esta Duplicado y vestiste otra con mejor visual Juan de jesus 0124 (talk) 20:00, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
borrar por los motivos planteados Juan de jesus 0124 (talk) 20:01, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
esta doble y la otra es mejor Juan de jesus 0124 (talk) 20:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
miss-chosen copyright status Ultimete (talk) 09:36, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per uploader. [24Cr][talk] 21:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Gingerbread museum, Moscow
[edit]No Commons:Freedom of panorama in Russia for 2D works.
- File:Музей пряника в Москве. Фото 1.jpg
- File:Музей пряника в Москве. Фото 2.jpg
- File:Музей пряника в Москве. Фото 20.jpg
- File:Музей пряника в Москве. Фото 8.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:09, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 19:44, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Canned food of Russia
[edit]Commons:Derivative works from commercial packaging.
- File:Говядина тушеная 01.jpg
- File:Говядина тушеная 02.jpg
- File:Мясные консервы.jpg
- File:Осетр с овощами 2.jpg
- File:Осетр с овощами.jpg
- File:Солянка с осетром 2.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:11, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 19:44, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mymymacmurray (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos and DW, missing essential info: original author, source, date, and permission.
- File:Sth 2016.jpg
- File:WCBW.jpg
- File:Wcl.jpg
- File:Chris Doerfler, Director of Women's Crisis Line.png
- File:Women's Crisis Line at gay pride parade 1976.png
- File:Crisis (2).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 19:44, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Steinberglove (talk · contribs)
[edit]Is user:Steinberglove the same as Amy Steinberg? Even if so, still not own works. File:Amy steinberg.jpg by Laura Wagner, and File:Amy Steinberg.jpg is taken from CD cover.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:20, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 19:45, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Unused logos, no educational value, out of scope.
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:25, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 19:45, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Little India, Singapore
[edit]Copyrighted mural Traditional Trades of Little India. As there is no freedom of panorama for 2D graphic works in Singapore, a free license permission from its artist Psyfool is required. (source of info for this public art)
- File:2016 Singapur, Little India, Mural (01).jpg
- File:2016 Singapur, Little India, Mural (02).jpg
- File:2016 Singapur, Little India, Mural (03).jpg
- File:2016 Singapur, Little India, Mural (05).jpg
- File:2016 Singapur, Little India, Mural (06).jpg
- File:2016 Singapur, Little India, Mural (07).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}
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:32, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
It is an old edited photograph of which two persons have been deleted. There are non edited, more recent and relevant photographs of the activities of Francisco Tudela 38.25.15.100 14:13, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
File:Francisco Tudela, Fernán Altuve y Alfredo Barnechea.jpg? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 191.125.152.130 (talk) 02:00, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:31, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Edited and seven years old photograph 38.25.15.100 01:37, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Y? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 191.125.152.130 (talk) 02:01, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- What's the basis for deletion? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:31, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
No Commons:Freedom of panorama in Russia for statues.
- File:Moscow, giant pink penguins in front of Bolshoi Theatre (30651827444).jpg
- File:Moscow, giant pink penguins in Manezhnaya Square (31455373256).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:13, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 12:27, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Coca-Cola signs in Russia
[edit]No Commons:Freedom of panorama in Russia for 2D works.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 12:27, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Artist's copyright violation. There is no freedom of panorama for 2D graphic works in Singapore. A major part of the image consists of a street artwork made by ANTZ of RSCLS art group, or Anthony Chong in real life (artist's info). Cropping or blurring it out leaves the whole image useless, therefore de minimis cannot be invoked. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:22, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 13:45, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Wcam as Logo. This logo appears to be trivial. However Commons:TOO Malaysia doesn't give clear guidence on trivial logos. MorganKevinJ(talk) 03:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Precautionary principle. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:05, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
not 1892, I misread the caption and the picture is not in public domain Artem.G (talk) 06:54, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:12, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Mistaken Ultimete (talk) 07:59, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:15, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Mistaken Ultimete (talk) 07:59, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:15, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Mural is unlikely to be created by artists who have been dead for more than 70 years. Needs commercial license permission from them or their heirs as freedom of panorama does not extend to copyrighted 2D graphic works in Singapore. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:07, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:16, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work of non-free Mascot in Japan 61.120.241.1 08:30, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:18, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
No exif, taken from an interview. Seems like its taken from a video like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YkwzG_bca7w although i can't find the exact match. PCP Gbawden (talk) 08:38, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by GivingLifeaShape (talk · contribs)
[edit]Copyrighted artwork by a living artist, VRT permission needed. The 1966 marine picture author is unknown.
- File:Hacker with Red Sculpture, 2020.jpg
- File:Hacker as a Marine, 1966.jpg
- File:Hacker, Teapot, 2018.jpg
- File:Hacker, Steel Sculpture, 2013.jpg
- File:2015-03-08 14.03.21 HDR.jpg
MKFI (talk) 10:30, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:21, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
copyright violation of Jess Winterburn 2A00:23C5:FF94:6F01:2158:2783:D4BD:9C36 07:46, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 19:32, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violatioin. This painting looks contemporary and was made inside a building in California. So no FOP, no public domain. And I do not see a VRT ticket. JopkeB (talk) 11:42, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- There is no violation (correct spelling) of copy right. Hacker Dojo logo in the mural is copyrighted. This photo is a portion of Mural by Charlie Doves,NYC, that is dedicated to recently deceased member of our community, James Turley who would visit Japan Cherry Blossom festival every year. Hacker Dojo is a public benefit charity. Please use full words instead of acronyms. 99.43.99.53 19:16, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reaction. Apologies for the spelling mistake and the abbreviations. Explanation:
- There is copyright violation because the painter owns the copyright of this mural and there is no clue that he permits that a photo of his work may be:
- Shared: everyone may copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt: everyone may remix, transform, and build upon the material
- for any purpose, even commercially.
- Commons wants to be sure that a painter does agree on this kind of reuse of his work and therefor asks for a VRT ticket (adressed to the Volunteer Response Team) of the painter (or his legal successors, like heirs, when he has passed away). An exception may be Freedom of Panorama (FOP), but in the United States there is no FOP for art works, see Commons:Freedom of panorama/Americas#United States of America.
- In your reaction I see no reason to withdraw this deletion request. The painter is Charlie Doves and it must be clear to Commons that he agrees on having a picture of his work in Commons. If he does, he can send an email to VRT, according to the VRT ticket requirements. If Commons does not receive such a mail, we assume that the painter does not agree and the photo will be deleted. Please keep us posted about the progress. --JopkeB (talk) 03:09, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This also applies to File:HackSeating.jpg if Charlie Doves is the painter of this art work. One mail to VRT for both photos is OK. If he is not the painter, then the painter of this work should send a VRT ticket for this work. --JopkeB (talk) 03:17, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:01, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
The initial date of the image publication is unknown according the source. Maxinvestigator (talk) 12:46, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Publication is made available to the public, this is a scan of a print. When the photographer sends a copy of the negative, as a print, to the sitter, the image is made public. This image is circa 1930, more than 70 years ago. --RAN (talk) 17:06, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - Possible PD in the EU, but not in the USA. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:04, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
This Catholic church was only completed in 2005 but Lithuania has no FOP for modern buildings Leoboudv (talk) 19:38, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
- oppose church design was made back in 1928 actually...更迅速 (talk) 18:18, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- oppose: That's a vandalism act. These photos are made by trusted wikipedia users, are widely used and the building is a public place. Hugo.arg (talk) 21:50, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
Misguided keeps and closure. The building may date to 1930s, yet its original architect, w:lt:Kārlis Reisons, lived long enough to ensure that his artwork cannot be exploited by anyone even in new media/digital media age. Since he died in 1981, his œuvre will remain protected until January 1, 2052, the 70th anniversary of his death (or unless Lithuania reforms their copyright law to allow commercial uses of architecture and permanent public art). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:59, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:05, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
This Catholic church was only completed in 2005 but Lithuania has no FOP for modern buildings Leoboudv (talk) 19:42, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
- oppose church design was made back in 1928 actually...更迅速 (talk) 18:18, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Could you please provide reference which supports this claim? --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:46, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- here briefly described the process. after initial design submission in '28 it was finally approved by commission in '33. Hope it helps. 更迅速 (talk) 17:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
- Could you please provide reference which supports this claim? --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:46, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Again misguided keep defense. The design may date to almost a hundred years ago, yet its author, Architect w:lt:Kārlis Reisons, died in 1981. Thus it is still copyrighted until January 1, 2052, or 70+1 years after he died. Unless an early undeletion comes if Lithuania's freedom of panorama becomes progressive and fit to the new media/digital media age. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:06, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
While the building dates back to 1930s and designs appeared in the 1920s, the author, Architect w:lt:Kārlis Reisons, only died in 1981. As there is no commercial freedom of panorama in Lithuania, this building remains under his heirs' copyright until 70+1 years after he died, on January 1, 2052. None of the nominated photos show the building as "not the main subject" or "accessory inclusion."
- File:Christ's Resurrection Church- biggest in Baltic states - panoramio.jpg
- File:Church of Christ's Resurrection, Kaunas 01.JPG
- File:Church of Christ's Resurrection, Kaunas 02.JPG
- File:Church of Christ's Resurrection, Kaunas 03.JPG
- File:Church of Christ's Resurrection, Kaunas 14.JPG
- File:Church of Christ's Resurrection, Kaunas 18.JPG
- File:Church of Christ's Resurrection, Kaunas 19.JPG
- File:Kaunas - Christi Auferstehung.jpg
- File:Kaunas Auferstehungskirche 1.JPG
- File:Kaunas Auferstehungskirche 2.JPG
- File:Kaunas Auferstehungskirche 3.JPG
- File:Kaunas Auferstehungskirche Chor.JPG
- File:Kaunas Auferstehungskirche Dach Turm 1.JPG
- File:Kaunas Auferstehungskirche Dach Turm 2.JPG
- File:Kaunas Auferstehungskirche Dach Turm 3.JPG
- File:Kaunas Auferstehungskirche Dach Turm 4.JPG
- File:Kaunas Auferstehungskirche Turm 1.JPG
- File:Kaunas Auferstehungskirche Turm 2.JPG
- File:Kaunas Auferstehungskirche Turm 3.JPG
- File:Kaunas Auferstehungskirche Turm 4.JPG
- File:Kaunas Auferstehungskirche Turm 5.JPG
- File:Kaunas Christ's Resurrection Church - panoramio (2).jpg
- File:On roof of Christ's Resurrection Church - panoramio.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Recht muß Recht bleiben, daher alle löschen! HaSt (talk) 15:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- (Google translate): Law must remain law, so delete all! _ translation conducted by JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:00, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:08, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
Omyłkowo załadowany plik odwrócony - potem drugi załadowany poprawnie, więc są zduplikowane AgnesMit (talk) 12:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 12:05, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by JuTa as Dw no source since (dw no source since). Is PD-old correct? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:28, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ich, 16Exul82 bekam das Bild auf einem deutschen Genealogentag im Jahr 2003 von einer sehr alten Dame geschenkt, weil ich einen Vortrag über die GERNER/ GÖRNER hielt. Sie gab mir das Original in meine Sammlung.
- Die Tradition der Familientreffen ist damit belegt, es gibt auch noch einen Buchhinweis. Der Herr der das Treffen 1927 organisierte war 1927 schon sehr betagt. (- und wäre bestimmt heute froh seine Mühen in der Wikipedia zu finden). Löscht es bitte nicht, in vier Jahren ist die 100 Jahresfrist da.16Exul82 (talk) 11:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Die 100-Jahres-Frist ist eine Sache der dt. Wikipedia. Wikimedia Commons hat eine 120-Jahres-Frist ({{PD-old-assumed}}). --Rosenzweig τ 16:48, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hallo Rosenzweig,
- es ist schon ein Kreuz mit den Alten Dokumenten. Deshalb habe ich das Dokument ausführlich beschrieben. Das Zeugnis wird aus Traditionsgründen benötigt. Die angesprochenen 120 Jahre kann ich leider nicht bieten. Lass es bitte drin. 16Exul82 (talk) 18:58, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
- Die 100-Jahres-Frist ist eine Sache der dt. Wikipedia. Wikimedia Commons hat eine 120-Jahres-Frist ({{PD-old-assumed}}). --Rosenzweig τ 16:48, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Kept: the file as such, but uploaded a new version with the photograph blanked and hid the first version. Ich habe es jetzt so gelöst, dass ich eine neue Dateiversion hochgeladen habe, in der das problematische Foto mit einem weißen Rechteck ersetzt ist. Der Text und die Girlanden außenrum sind nicht problematisch, weil ohne die nötige Schöpfungshöhe. Die originale Version ist noch da, aber versteckt; sie kann 2048 (nach 120 Jahren) mit {{PD-old-assumed}} wieder sichtbar gemacht werden. --Rosenzweig τ 19:51, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by A proietti (talk · contribs)
[edit]These don't appear to be re-drawn, but rather lifted right from 2017 Ships and Submarines of the United States Navy, a PDF from Raytheon, and marked Copyright © 2017, Raytheon Company. We would need COM:VRT permission from Raytheon to keep these.
File:Spearhead class.pngThis is an original drawing, my mistakeFile:Puller class.pngThis is an original drawing, my mistake- File:Tornado class.png
- File:Zumwalt class.png
- File:Whidbey island class.png
- File:Wasp class.png
- File:Virginia class.png
- File:Ticonderoga class.png
- File:Seawolf class.png
- File:San Antonio class.png First file revision only
- File:Ohio class.png
- File:Nimitz class.png
- File:Los Angeles class.png
- File:Independence class.png
- File:Harpers ferry class.png
- File:Freedon class.png
- File:Avenger class.png
- File:Ford class.png
- File:Blue Ridge Class.png
- File:Arleigh burke flight III class.png
- File:Arleigh burke flight I II class.png
- File:America class.png
- File:Arleigh burke flight IIA class.png
Carl Lindberg (talk) 05:58, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hi. The first two images were created directly by me. They are not present on the document you mentioned. For the others I converted the images into SVG files and redesigned some parts. Since these are technical profiles, any design created from scratch will inevitably be the same as the other. I therefore kindly ask how to proceed to maintain these images. A proietti (talk) 22:31, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- OK, my mistake on the first two. Thanks for that. I spot checked about five of them, and they all seemed to come from the PDF. As for the rest though, most of the small details were identical -- while similar technical profiles will always be somewhat similar, choosing all the little details to leave in and which to leave out, and how to represent them, will end up being the copyrightable expression. Original renditions won't be the same in so many details. You may have altered them, possibly adding enough of your own expression to qualify for an additional copyright if you changed enough and added your own details, but even if so they are still Commons:Derivative works of the originals since so many of the details are still the same. For example, you can tell the drawing on this fas.org page is a completely different drawing than File:Nimitz class.png. The basic outline is the same obviously, but all of the little details are different. Likewise, this image is yet a different drawing. And this image is obviously the same source as the fas.org drawing. If you can find a U.S. federal government source to start with, that would be much better, since that would not be under copyright. Such as the images on this page (which has a different Nimitz class drawing). It's possible Raytheon took their outlines from government documents, but I don't see any credits as such, and we would need to actually find the source drawing to show that Raytheon did not alter them much.
- Much like we need Wikipedia authors to write original text, we need illustrators to make original drawings and take original photographs -- the copyright principles are the same, regardless if it's text or a drawing. We can't copy someone else's work, unless that work is public domain, which gets more difficult to show. You can certainly use someone else's photograph to find ship details, and then decide which ones to show and how, and that sort of thing -- but copying someone else's specific lines is where the problem comes in. Same principle as text -- you can't take someone's article, and change a few words, and have it be independent copyright-wise -- you'd have to reword the entire thing. I'm sure you spent a fair amount of time on these, but unfortunately we can't copy all the small details that are in the Raytheon drawings, so I'm not sure how these specific ones are salvageable. You would really need to change all or at least nearly all the small details. Carl Lindberg (talk) 02:15, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- I thank you. I will replace the images. A proietti (talk) 04:02, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- I've started with changes.
- San Antonio class is completely redrawn.
- I'm just going to work to the other pictures.
- Thanks A proietti (talk) 10:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- I thank you. I will replace the images. A proietti (talk) 04:02, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and discussion, all but the first two that were already struck from the DR and the redrawn versions of one file. --Rosenzweig τ 16:06, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
no author given no permission from license holder Hoyanova (talk) 14:59, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 17:58, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
The CBS website still uses the logo from 2020. This logo seems to be fictional and therefore out of scope. TilmannR (talk) 12:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Unused and fictional logo should not used there. 36.65.39.46 03:48, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 15:24, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
The CBS website still uses the logo from 2020. This logo seems to be fictional and therefore out of scope. TilmannR (talk) 12:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- All edits by this user look suspicious to me, from non-existing logos/TV channels to breaking existing files. It might be necessary to go over all of them, and see if anything needs to be reverted/deleted... Victor LP (talk) 10:48, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 15:23, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by JuTa as Dw no source since (dw no source since). Is PD-old correct? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:35, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Die Geldscheinnummer wurde lediglich geändert und mit dem Zusatzhinweis auf die Drei Türme, die drei Getreuen ergänzt. Der Stecher der Druckstockes für den Notgeldschein ist garantiert 70 Jahre tot. Da die damalige Druckerei im heuten Polen liegt, kann die Existenz der Druckerei nicht mehr nachgewiesen werden. PD-old könnte so, wie es JuTa sagte, angewendet werden.16Exul82 (talk) 11:20, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- @16Exul82: Im Bild rechts unten sehe ich eine Signatur, das könnte hS heißen. Die findet sich auch bei File:Sorau (Żary) - 10Pf. 1921.jpg und File:Sorau (Żary) - 50Pf. 1921.jpg, die mit dem sehr fragwürdigen Lizenzbaustein {{PD-GermanGov-currency}} versehen sind. Gibt es einen Künstler mit diesen Initialen, der in Frage kommt? --Rosenzweig τ 20:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
_-_10Pf._1921.jpg){kind=link}
_-_50Pf._1921.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: No rationale for keeping the scan of this object which is signed with initials. It is unclear who owns the copyright, so the image must be deleted per COM:PRP. Can be undeleted safely 120 years after 1921, which will be 1921+121=2042. --Ellywa (talk) 20:54, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Undeleted: Per research of Rosenzweig who wrote on my talk page:
- Hello Ellywa,
- I have now found what the hS initials stand for: de:Heinz Schiestl, 1867–1940, see Category:Banknotes by Schiestl, Heinz. So now that we know that this 1921 banknote is in the PD both in Germany and the US, would you please restore the file? I could just do it myself or go to COM:UNDEL, but wanted to ask you first because you closed the DR. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 14:39, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by JuTa as Dw no source since (dw no source since). Is PD-old correct? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Die Ansichtskarte ist von 1928, das ist über 70 Jahre her. Der Druckverlag existiert nicht mehr. Was steht einer heutigen Veröffentlichung konkret im Weg? Wenn es um das Kinoplakat DIE TODESSCHLEIFE gehen würde, wäre es eine Panorama-Aufnahme, vielleicht sollten wir dem Bild einen neuen Namen geben. 16Exul82 (talk) 11:26, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: It is not relevant whether the “Druckverlag” still exist or it doesn’t exist. The image is still copyrighted, and the copyright probably owned by the heirs or some other company who bought the assets. Can be undeleted safely 120 years after 1928, which will be 1921+128=2049.. --Ellywa (talk) 20:57, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by JuTa as Dw no source since (dw no source since). Is PD-old correct? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hier gilt das gleiche wie für die Außenaufnahme, die Aufnahme ist von 1928. In sechs Jahren kommt die 100 Jahresfrist ja in Betracht.16Exul82 (talk) 08:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. It is not relevant whether the “Druckverlag” still exist or it doesn’t exist. The image is still copyrighted, and the copyright probably owned by the heirs or some other company who bought the assets. Can be undeleted safely 120 years after 1928, which will be 1921+128=2049.. --Ellywa (talk) 20:58, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Luis1944MX as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: F1. Clear copyright violation. This is claimed to be textlogo. In my opinion discussion is needed, but it seems to me, that the logo is eligible for copyright. I rather support deletion. Taivo (talk) 08:17, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete We don't know if the author has made the logo available free/pd. That's to say it doesn't belong to Commons in its current state, we'd need a release via VRTS from the author if the logo is it be stored here. ─ The Aafī (talk) 06:47, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Logo above COM:TOO imho. --Ellywa (talk) 20:59, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rizzani_de_Eccher_logo.png Riccardodee (talk) 08:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Speedy keep No stated reason for nomination. The logo appears to be under COM:TOO Italy, so I think this is fine to have on Commons. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:27, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per remark of Red-tailed hawk, below TOO. --Ellywa (talk) 21:01, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
erroneous naming Ultimete (talk) 09:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy keep If this is a representation of a legitimate tablet, and the file is merely erroneously named, the proper thing to do would be to request that the file be moved rather than delete the file outright. The nominator does not appear to contest that this is a representation of a legitimate tablet, so there is no valid rationale for deletion here. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:29, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, please rename the image, per remark of Red-tailed hawk. --Ellywa (talk) 21:02, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
GJSTU doesn't apply on social media acoount of the Japanese Kantei 219.78.191.55 11:23, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. The twitter account does not show a free licence of the material, https://twitter.com/kantei. --Ellywa (talk) 21:04, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Not own work. Images taken from V&A Museum collections database. Watermark on image implies incorrect ownership. Individual artworks (anonymous/unknown artists) are probably old enough to be presumed PD by now, but not sure about the rules regarding this if V&A website was their first official publication (about 6-7 years ago) Mabalu (talk) 11:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per COM:PRP. It's unclear when these were first published and this is certainly not an "own work". — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:30, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and remark. --Ellywa (talk) 21:08, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
These became PD in 2005, which is after the URAA date. They will be under copyright in the USA until 1/1/2051. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Image was first published in Fiji and is now in the public domain because its copyright has expired pursuant to the Fijian Copyright Act 1999.--RicHard-59 (talk) 14:09, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Kept: I do not see sufficient arguments for deleting this image. According to en: MV Joyita the wreck was towed to Suva in Fiji. Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Fiji a photograph is in PD 50 years after it was created. As the photo dates from 1955, it is now in PD in Fiji. The Wikimedia Foundation – through the statement of the Legal department - does not see a reason to delete content simply because of general concern about the URAA. The document on Commons at COM:URAA states “A mere allegation that the URAA applies to a file cannot be the sole reason for deletion.” I decided to keep the image, because it has a correct licence for the country where it originated. If you do not agree with this decision, you are kindly requested to nominate the image again for deletion in order to have a broader discussion about it. --Ellywa (talk) 21:20, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by RicHard-59 (talk · contribs)
[edit]These all came from or are copied from icons at www.pegi.info. The terms of use there say, "The PEGI trademarks and logos used on this website are the exclusive property of PEGI and may not be used without PEGI’s explicit consent to do so." PEGI, s.a. is a Belgian non profit company. The Threshold of Originality in Belgium is not summarized at COM:TOO, but these would be above the ToO in most countries.
- File:PEGI Violence.svg
- File:FI-SEKSI.svg
- File:FI-PÄIHDE.svg
- File:FI-AHDISTUS.svg
- File:FI-VÄKIVALTA.svg
- File:PEGI Bad language.svg
- File:PEGI Nudity.svg
- File:PEGI Online annotated.svg
- File:PEGI Bad language annotated.svg
- File:PEGI Nudity annotated.svg
- File:PEGI Drugs.svg
- File:PEGI Fear.svg
- File:PEGI Gambling.svg
. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:19, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep File:FI-SEKSI.svg
- Keep File:FI-PÄIHDE.svg
- Keep File:FI-AHDISTUS.svg
- Keep File:FI-VÄKIVALTA.svg
- Keep These files are not from PEGI, but are based on images on http://www.meku.fi/ikarajat/. User:Pullaharakka uploaded images with "FI" removed. I reverted the images.--RicHard-59 (talk) 15:36, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Only my svg's? Not png's or gif's in Category:PEGI classification by type?
Keep "My" Pegi-svg's are based in the images from Pegi, that were used as model on inkscape.--RicHard-59 (talk) 16:42, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- In User talk:RicHard-59#PEGI icons I explain to fellow wikipedian "How did you make the background PEGI-word pattern match the original so precisely?".--RicHard-59 (talk) 08:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per these are logos under copyrighted and least not all cannot be thanked to be simple geometric shapes. -- Zache (talk) 07:18, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- In User talk:RicHard-59#PEGI icons I explain to fellow wikipedian "How did you make the background PEGI-word pattern match the original so precisely?".--RicHard-59 (talk) 08:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, also those who are based on http://www.meku.fi/ikarajat/ . On that website it is not shown these images are in PD or freely licenced. So the images are derivative works of copyrighted designs and have to be deleted. --Ellywa (talk) 21:24, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- Some files restored, as per [2]. Yann (talk) 15:58, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Copyviol from https://www.diocesitursi.it/. 87.17.169.177 17:25, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellywa (talk) 21:25, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
