Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2022/06/02
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
_17052021_04_-_cropped.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![51 File:Меморіал при вході у хаб "Космодром".png](#File:Меморіал_при_вході_у_хаб_"Космодром".png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
_on_the_Runway_of_Mercedes_Benz_Fashion_Week.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_in_2017.jpg){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Shizhao as no permission (No permission since). Age of this painting? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- see [1], author is en:Hua Sanchuan,die 2004, not PD shizhao (talk) 04:11, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
I do not have the right to publish this image Msmitraillette (talk) 16:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
car on me dit que je ne suis pas les droit d'auteur merci de la suprimer au plus vite merci Msmitraillette (talk) 17:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 19:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
07 (talk) 13:03, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio at 13:50, 2 June 2022 UTC: Copyright violation: not self-created, not free. https://www.youtube.com/c/ERL%C4%B0K61/videos --Krdbot 19:29, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope
-Killarnee (C•T•U) 13:04, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Speedied as COM:NETCOPYVIOs from here. --Эlcobbola talk 19:42, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
_17052021_04_-_cropped.jpg){kind=link}
_17052021_04_-_cropped.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Because it is Nonsense RA NAFIS46 (talk) 17:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense request by another Android app user who could not resist. --Achim55 (talk) 19:31, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Unused personal image. No useful categories, so lost in our 40 million images. Claimed "own work" of the subject, but doesn't look like a selfie. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:38, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:30, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 09:53, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Likely copyviol; dubious usefulness Lone-078 (talk) 14:59, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
{{Db-f9|reason=Unambigous Copyright Infringement}} 171.252.154.58 05:42, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: yesterday by Yann. --Achim55 (talk) 21:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio from here. Photo by Michael Wiegmann according to Impressum, all rights reserved according to her own website, no CC licensing. 87.150.4.195 21:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by EugeneZelenko at 15:55, 5 June 2022 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing (F1): Promo/press photo --Krdbot 19:45, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Didym as no permission (No permission since). Converting to DR as user replied on their talk page and did not receive a response. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:45, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @DolevMor: Please ask Eran Even to follow the instructions at COM:RELGEN in order to release the image under a Creative Commons license via email, and reply here to confirm that you have done so. If you take no action, then the image may be deleted in approximately one week. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:50, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Hello. Eran Even confirmed the photo as your request, according to the link and email. Thank you very much, Dolev Mor.
Ticket:2022060610007501 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 14:00, 6 June 2022 (UTC)- I have just accepted permission for “File:דולב מור, 2021.jpg” under ticket:2022060610007501. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:16, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per VRT permission. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:17, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: diploma, use of Commons as personnal storage CoffeeEngineer (talk) 00:30, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:10, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Diploma; Use of Commons for personal storage CoffeeEngineer (talk) 00:31, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:10, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Omdurman city April 2021 191.126.154.237 00:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:10, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Sammy Baker compilation 191.126.154.237 00:55, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:11, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Leupin ist erst 1999 verstorben, somit keine 70 Jahre vergangen Jbergner (talk) 06:42, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Das ist so offensichtlich, kann man das nicht schnell erledigen? --87.150.3.8 08:09, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: by Yann. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:11, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
artist died in 1984 (less than 70 years ago) M2k~dewiki (talk) 10:23, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Same for
- File:Patrick Nagel 02.jpg
- File:Patrick Nagel 03.jpg
- File:Patrick Nagel 04.jpg
- File:Patrick Nagel 05.jpg
- File:Patrick Nagel 06.jpg
--M2k~dewiki (talk) 10:25, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Delete, unless evidence can be provided that there was indeed no copyright notice on the magazine itself (which is extremely unlikely). --ShyAlpaca482 (talk) 21:31, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:11, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Out of the project scope? Commons is not a private photo album Estopedist1 (talk) 11:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:11, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Unused personal logo, out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 11:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:11, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by MehmetCan08 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE. Unused logo and website images are questionable notability.
Netora (talk) 11:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:11, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Screenshot from a music video clip, as stated by the uploader themselves. No proof of permission from the producers of the clip. Gikü (talk) 12:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:11, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of project scope due to small size and bad quality. No metadata. Taivo (talk) 13:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:11, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by SNestorovic (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagrams of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.
- File:Mind Map week 4.jpg
- File:Screenshot 20220530-213730 Chrome.png
- File:LGBT Culture.jpg
- File:Mind Map Week 3.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:12, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:12, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Attackingwiki (talk · contribs)
[edit]Uploaded files are clearly CopyVios, 6x GoogleMaps
- File:PML-N Qayyum Abbad Colony.jpg
- File:Qayyum Abbad Colony img edited.jpg
- File:Qayyum Abbad Colony lakhan Rawalpindi.jpg
- File:Qayyum Abbad Colony قیوم آباد کالونی.jpg
- File:Qayyum Abbad Colony Rawalpindi.jpg
- File:Qayyum Abbad Colony.jpg
1x screengrabs of some TV channel.
1x unknown source, very unlikely to be own work, more likely another TV screengrab: a photographer who first manages to take pictures of a bird in flight (!!), wouldn't upload such a horrible quality afterwards
-- Enyavar (talk) 16:32, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination - MPF (talk) 00:11, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:12, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
This logo is a lie SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 16:42, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete badly photoshopped fake logo uploaded for a hoax article on the English wikipedia. 192.76.8.78 20:32, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete I interpret the nomination as indicating that this is an invented logo for a non-existent television channel. I agree with this assessment.
- I can find no evidence that the BBC has a TV station called "BBC One Bangla", or has used this branding. The BBC has a radio station named BBC Bangla. They make Bengali-language television programmes that are branded as 'BBC Probaho'[2] and are broadcast in Bangladesh by Channel i. Some of these programmes are available on YouTube under #bbc_probaho.[3]
- BBC One is an English-language TV station. The BBC's Bengali-language TV programmes are unlikely to be branded as 'BBC One'.
- This logo appears to be a poorly-constructed combination of a BBC One logo (see Category:BBC television channel logos) and the text from w:en:File:BBC Bangla logo.svg. It should be deleted as misleading and as being out of scope as not being realistically useful for an educational purpose, see COM:EDUSE. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- I spoke to the BBC about the porkies that the uploader made. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 23:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Verbcatcher See W:Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:BBC One Bangla, the corresponding discussion on the English wikipedia. This is some kid on YouTube with 30 subscribers running a fake news channel where they are reuploading programmes from other TV stations with this logo photoshopped on. 192.76.8.78 00:32, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bbconebangla.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:BBCOneBD2019.jpg, for similar logos from the same uploader. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:12, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
This logo is also a lie SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 16:42, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete badly photoshopped fake logo uploaded for a hoax article on the English wikipedia. 192.76.8.78 20:32, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as a probable hoax logo, see the discussion in Commons:Deletion requests/File:BBC One Bangla.jpg. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:12, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
This is a huge fat lie SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 16:43, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as a very poorly photoshoped hoax logo for a non-existent TV channel, created for a hoax article on the English wikipedia. 192.76.8.78 20:29, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as a probable hoax logo, see the discussion in Commons:Deletion requests/File:BBC One Bangla.jpg. Verbcatcher (talk) 22:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:12, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Abutment4Life (talk · contribs)
[edit]Screenshots of commercial software by 3Shape. Permission required to store it here with free licence. All files used only on uploaders de.wiki page. No other contributions.
- File:Schritt-8.jpg
- File:Schritt 6-.jpg
- File:Schritt-7.jpg
- File:Schritt-5.jpg
- File:Schritt-4.jpg
- File:Schritt-3.jpg
- File:Schritt-2.jpg
- File:Schritt-1.jpg
GeorgHH • talk 17:35, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:13, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kardeşlerim Berk Özkaya (talk · contribs)
[edit]no evidence any of these are own work and it appears the uploader is just using commons as a webhost
- File:For fur.png
- File:Televison series.png
- File:Forever and furlover.png
- File:Baby my forever.png
- File:GET LOST BITCHES!.png
- File:BEBEĞİM.png
Praxidicae (talk) 17:35, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 07:12, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kardeşlerim Berk Özkaya (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos. Should be in SVG if useful.
- File:BGN Gazete.png
- File:BGN Radyo Televizyon.png
- File:Osmanlı.png
- File:Tansaş Eski Logo.webp
- File:Tansaş Yeni Logo.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 04:50, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 13:25, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
commos no es lugar para subir fotos de uno mismo Ontzak 
(Bilbo ta Bizkai guztia) 08:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:08, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
foto personal del usuario Ontzak (Bilbo ta Bizkai guztia) 08:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:08, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
foto de un menor. Ontzak (Bilbo ta Bizkai guztia) 08:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:07, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
inapropiada Ontzak (Bilbo ta Bizkai guztia) 08:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:08, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Leifpotter (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of the project scope? Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion.
Estopedist1 (talk) 09:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:09, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
unused selfie; blurry Jochen Burghardt (talk) 09:30, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:09, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:46, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:11, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:11, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- also file:Чивиков читает стихотворение.jpg
Depicted person is not notable (no mention in ru.wiki). The photos are out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 14:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:13, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:13, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE as "Files that contain nothing educational other than raw text", may also be a copyvio if the uploader did not personally write the text. Lord Belbury (talk) 15:17, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:13, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE, "nothing educational other than raw text". Lord Belbury (talk) 15:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:14, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Too poor quality. We have some pictures of this person, see Category:Agenor Fernandes Barbosa. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 16:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:15, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
unused self-advertising image Jochen Burghardt (talk) 18:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:17, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
unused self-advertising image Jochen Burghardt (talk) 18:39, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:17, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused corporate logo, only use was a spam page on en.wp, now deleted. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:27, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:18, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Personal photo for non-wikipedian: Out of scope --Alaa :)..! 21:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:18, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 21:55, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:18, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Commons is not a hosting service for personal doodles Dronebogus (talk) 21:55, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 19:19, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
DW o no? 191.126.154.237 00:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 16:06, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Ukraine, we need the written permission from the muralist 223.197.185.54 06:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
![06:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/06/02#c-223.197.185.54-2022-06-02T06:34:00.000Z-File:Меморіал_при_вході_у_хаб_"Космодром".png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 16:10, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
![16:10, 10 June 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/06/02#c-IronGargoyle-2022-06-10T16:10:00.000Z-File:Меморіал_при_вході_у_хаб_"Космодром".png){kind=link}
Copyright violation 83.200.34.180 07:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 16:13, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
JSC in his natural Habitat 191.126.154.237 00:42, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Uploader personal photo; only upload on Commons, no in-scope contributions by user on en:w (just silly sandbox about self). --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:37, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Me da miedo... 191.126.154.237 00:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: That's not a reason for deletion, but copyright violation is. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:39, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Que fea! 191.126.154.237 00:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violation. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:39, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Shizhao as no permission (No permission since). 1917 work, taken in Texas according to Wikipedia caption. PD if: 1) work by US or UK military (Crown Copyright); 2) first published before 1927 in the US; or 3) first published in the UK and author died before 1952. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Keep PD in UK and USA, we don't need permission for public domain works. --RAN (talk) 06:03, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per RAN. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:40, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Shizhao as no permission (No permission since). {{PD-UKGov}}? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep PD-UK-unknown 70 years from when made public. --RAN (talk) 06:12, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per RAN. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:42, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Appears to an invalid "own work" claim. The source is given as a YouTube video, and the channel has no apparent connection to the uploading Wikipedia user Meters (talk) 06:55, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- Uploader has an extensive history of uploading copyright violations and has previously been blocked for same. Meters (talk) 07:05, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:43, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Copyrighted book cover. MKFI (talk) 07:45, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:43, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/Cercosporin
[edit]Missing essential stereochemical detail (per doi:10.1021/jacs.6b00633, atropisomeric detail is notable; as well at the two hydroxyls), and large margins. Have File:Cercosporin.png as high quality replacement with full stereo detail.
- File:Abb3.106 Pilze Ascomycota Dothideomycetes Capnodiales Cercospora Cercosporin Strukturformel 2021 (M. Piepenbring).svg
- File:Abb3.106 Pilze Ascomycota Dothideomycetes Capnodiales Cercospora Cercosporin Strukturformel 2021 (M. Piepenbring).png
- File:Abb3.106 Ascomycota Dothideomycetes Capnodiales Cercospora cercosporin chemical structure 2021 (M. Piepenbring).png
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
DMacks (talk) 23:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. The three nominated images are not really usable as they are because of their large margins. Perhaps they could be cropped, but since the atropisomerism that DMacks discusses is a key structural feature to this compound, a representation without that information is inferior. We have File:Cercosporin.png which includes this detail that should be used instead. Marbletan (talk) 12:50, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Leyo 23:53, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
images grabbed from internet.
- File:Crypto coins coach.jpg
- File:Abdul Ahmed Olorunfemi Mustapha.jpg
- File:Abdul-Ahmed-Mustapha.jpg
- File:SamApp Logo.jpg
- File:Dr. Jessica Widjaja.jpg
RZuo (talk) 07:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:41, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Not educationally useful because no pages that use this photo Анастасия Давыдова (talk) 17:28, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. There is no rule that a photo has to be linked to another page in order to be hosted here. Please do not nominate photos for deletion on such a basis, as it wastes everyone's time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:21, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Don't you think this source should be an educational? In my opinion, Instagram is more suitable for such photos
- According to Commons:Deletion policy there is a rule:
- Out of scope: Not educationally useful - The file is not realistically useful for an educational purpose. Examples of files that are not realistically useful include:
- Private image collections, e.g. private party photos, photos of yourself and your friends, your collection of holiday snaps and so on. There are plenty of other projects on the Internet you can use for such a purpose, such as Flickr. Such private image collections do not become educational even if displayed as a gallery on a user page on Commons or elsewhere. Анастасия Давыдова (talk) 16:24, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Photos of models on the runway at fashion industry events are quite obviously within the broad educational purview of this site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:56, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Per COM:INUSE. Deleting uses of the image on other projects[4] is not a valid means to get your way in a deletion debate. If you can't articulate a sound reason for deletion, then this should be kept. From Hill To Shore (talk) 23:40, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Also note that the nominator attempted to hide the image by removing the category and key words from the file.[5] From Hill To Shore (talk) 00:35, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
![[5]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AAnn_Jane_Arko_Anny_Photoshoot_in_Yellow_Top_in_April_12_2015.jpg&type=revision&diff=664221857&oldid=662180610){kind=link}
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 06:46, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright and license issues caused by uploader. Please remove this photo and all information about it as it violates the photographer's copyright. Unfortunately, I lost access to my old Robertsparks account from which I uploaded photos to the site in 2018 and wrote an article on Wikipedia, which was later removed by the admins. I made a number of mistakes: I didn't include the photographer's name and chose a free licence. I have now been contacted by the photographer and demanded the photo be removed as photographer haven’t given permission for free commercial use. Please, I ask you to remove the photo for me to avoid legal issues. I didn’t have enough knowledge about copyright at that time and uploaded those photos because I was asked by the model, but it turned out that I didn’t have a right to do that. Please help me. I promise you it will not happen again. Furthermore, the main article of which the photo was a part has been removed and the photos are not relevant to any article at this time. Newrobertsparks (talk) 05:18, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
This seems implausible. The uploader left no contact details but the "real copyright owner" has managed to track down the uploader and issue a legal threat outside of Wikimedia? How would that have been possible? A quick Google search finds many different people called Robert Sparks, so tracking the uploader by their real name (if that is what was used here) is unlikely.- If the "copyright owner" has reached the point of issuing legal threats, they should follow the process set out in wmf:DMCA Policy. This includes an initial, informal stage of proving they (or the person they represent) are the copyright owner and asking for the file to be removed. If that is not successful (or they wish to go straight to the formal process) they can issue a DMCA takedown notice.
Barring more substantive evidence of a copyright violation, this should default toFrom Hill To Shore (talk) 07:08, 2 April 2024 (UTC) Keep.I missed that part about them claiming to have uploaded on behalf of the model (and presumably trying to write an English Wikipedia article on the model's behalf). However, that suggests more that the subject has changed their mind about sharing the file after failing to obtain a Wikipedia article rather than a lack of initial permission. As before, we need the "copyright owner" to contact us to prove their ownership before we can consider a takedown. A claim from a new Wikimedia account unrelated to the uploader's account (and offering no supporting evidence) can't be trusted.From Hill To Shore (talk) 07:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)- Striking out my previous comments. A TinEye search now shows a thumbnail of this image was available online in August 2017 but the file was uploaded here in 2018 with a claim of own work. The 2017 site redirects me to online adverts when I try to access it, so we only have the TinEye record to rely on. However, as copyright resides in the creative choices of the photographer rather than the size of image produced, the thumbnail counts as prior publication. As we can't rely on the source website, we would need evidence of permission through COM:VRT, which it sounds like it will be unlikely to materialise. Delete as copyvio. From Hill To Shore (talk) 09:19, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your understanding. The real author of the photo contacted me through the model who provided me with the photos for inclusion in the Wikipedia article. I would be very grateful if you could help me with the removal of two other photos from the same model, of which I’m not the author or copyright owner: photo 1 and photo 2. I’m not sure who is the copyright owner of the photo 1 but photo 2 I got from official Mercedes Benz Fashion Week Russia website so I guess they are the owners. Any advice or help would be appreciated as I now realise I made a mistake in 2018 and uploaded photos here without having the right to do so. I can provide you with screenshots of WhatsApp and email proving that the files with these photos were sent to me. Unfortunately I lost the password to the RobertSparks account from which I uploaded everything, and the linked email was deactivated a long time ago. Other photos that were in the article were immediately deleted because they were pages from magazines and the source of derivative work was not properly indicated. Newrobertsparks (talk) 18:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- To start off, we can't accept an unproven claim that you are the original uploader. People try to delete files all the time and employ various tactics, so a claim of, "Trust me I am the original account holder but lost my password," holds little weight. We must consider other arguments for deletion or retention.
- The simplest way to delete the other files is if you are able to locate a copy on a website or physical publication and can show that it was published before it was uploaded here. If so, you can use the "report a copyright violation" link on the file page and include a link to the other website; if it was from a physical publication, it may be better to start a deletion discussion as you have more space to explain the details.
- Failing that, start another deletion discussion like this one but reference the evidence we have here on a copyright violation for one of the files uploaded by this account. As 1 of the 3 uploads appears to be a copyright violation, the consensus may be that the account shouldn't be trusted and the file deleted. This is not a certain outcome as it relies on the strength of arguments made by editors.
- Finally, the copyright owner has the DMCA option per my struck out comments above. From Hill To Shore (talk) 23:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your understanding. The real author of the photo contacted me through the model who provided me with the photos for inclusion in the Wikipedia article. I would be very grateful if you could help me with the removal of two other photos from the same model, of which I’m not the author or copyright owner: photo 1 and photo 2. I’m not sure who is the copyright owner of the photo 1 but photo 2 I got from official Mercedes Benz Fashion Week Russia website so I guess they are the owners. Any advice or help would be appreciated as I now realise I made a mistake in 2018 and uploaded photos here without having the right to do so. I can provide you with screenshots of WhatsApp and email proving that the files with these photos were sent to me. Unfortunately I lost the password to the RobertSparks account from which I uploaded everything, and the linked email was deactivated a long time ago. Other photos that were in the article were immediately deleted because they were pages from magazines and the source of derivative work was not properly indicated. Newrobertsparks (talk) 18:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Striking out my previous comments. A TinEye search now shows a thumbnail of this image was available online in August 2017 but the file was uploaded here in 2018 with a claim of own work. The 2017 site redirects me to online adverts when I try to access it, so we only have the TinEye record to rely on. However, as copyright resides in the creative choices of the photographer rather than the size of image produced, the thumbnail counts as prior publication. As we can't rely on the source website, we would need evidence of permission through COM:VRT, which it sounds like it will be unlikely to materialise.
_wearing_the_dress_from_her_collection_The_Breath_of_Africa.jpg){kind=link}
_on_the_Runway_of_Mercedes_Benz_Fashion_Week.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. Small file, no EXIF data, and [6]. Not used. --Yann (talk) 17:18, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Complex logos can be in Commons only with VRT-permission. Source country is Algeria. Taivo (talk) 12:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 09:07, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
_on_the_Runway_of_Mercedes_Benz_Fashion_Week.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_on_the_Runway_of_Mercedes_Benz_Fashion_Week.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
{{subst:ofud}} Анастасия Давыдова (talk) 17:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
_on_the_Runway_of_Mercedes_Benz_Fashion_Week.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep. There is no rule that a photo has to be linked to on another page in order to be hosted here. Please do not nominate photos for deletion on such a basis, as it wastes everyone's time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:22, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Procedural Keep. As the nominator has listed the same file for deletion twice, I am closing this first debate early to avoid confusion. The deletion discussion can continue in the second debate below. From Hill To Shore (talk) 00:08, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
_on_the_Runway_of_Mercedes_Benz_Fashion_Week.jpg){kind=link}
_on_the_Runway_of_Mercedes_Benz_Fashion_Week.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
Not educationally useful because no pages that use this photo Анастасия Давыдова (talk) 17:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. There is no rule that a photo has to be linked to on another page in order to be hosted here. Please do not nominate photos for deletion on such a basis, as it wastes everyone's time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:20, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Don't you think this source should be an educational? In my opinion, Instagram is more suitable for such photos
- According to Commons:Deletion policy there is a rule:
- Out of scope: Not educationally useful - The file is not realistically useful for an educational purpose. Examples of files that are not realistically useful include:
- Private image collections, e.g. private party photos, photos of yourself and your friends, your collection of holiday snaps and so on. There are plenty of other projects on the Internet you can use for such a purpose, such as Flickr. Such private image collections do not become educational even if displayed as a gallery on a user page on Commons or elsewhere. Анастасия Давыдова (talk) 16:30, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- In what world is a photo of a model at Fashion Week not educational? This is not at all equivalent to a random person's selfie. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:55, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep No valid reason for deletion. Please note that the nominator removed this image from its category[7] and also tried to defeat a COM:INUSE argument on a related file by removing its usage on Wikidata.[8] I am tracking this user's global history now to see if similar edits have occured to alter the perception of other files they have nominated. From Hill To Shore (talk) 00:08, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
![[7]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AAnny_%28Ann_Jane_Arko%29_on_the_Runway_of_Mercedes_Benz_Fashion_Week.jpg&type=revision&diff=662174427&oldid=660921203){kind=link}
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Wdwd (talk) 13:41, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
_on_the_Runway_of_Mercedes_Benz_Fashion_Week.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-3){kind=link}
Copyright violation. Please remove this photo and all information about it as it violates the photographer's copyright. Unfortunately, I lost access to my old Robertsparks account from which I uploaded photos to the site in 2018 and wrote an article on Wikipedia about the model, which was later removed by the admins. I made a number of mistakes: I didn't include the photographer's name and chose a free licence. I have now been contacted by the photographer through the model and demanded the photo be removed as photographer haven’t given permission for free commercial use. Please, I ask you to remove the photo for me to avoid legal issues. I didn’t have enough knowledge about copyright at that time and uploaded those photos because I was asked by the model, but it turned out that I didn’t have a right to do that. Please help me. Furthermore, the main article of which the photo was a part has been removed and the photos are not relevant to any article at this time. Newrobertsparks (talk) 00:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- My old account Robertsparks was used only to upload the photos of one particular model. When I uploaded it, I violated the copyright without understanding that. Please, check out this link as an evidence of the fact that Robertsparks is not the author and copyright holder. The photo was made in 2016 during the Mercedes Benz Fashion Week Moscow and was posted on the official fashion week website and social media. Several photos uploaded by Robertsparks have been already deleted due to the lack of copyright evidence. Newrobertsparks (talk) 00:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete As copyvio. Uploaded here in 2018 with a claim of creation by the uploader in September 2017. The Instagram link above shows the image was available from May 2017. From Hill To Shore (talk) 00:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Please, it's been a while. How can we get an admin to close the discussion? Newrobertsparks (talk) 02:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Copyvio. The image was posted on Instagram earlier than it's claimed by the uploader to be created Wizardofwords25 (talk) 02:15, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, and discussion. --Yann (talk) 17:12, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Why only for this town? There are some other thousands of photos to take for each other town ... Pep CeMor (talk) 13:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep No valid deletion rationale, and any of the thousands of other motifs you allude to could merit their own photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:17, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Madenhausen is a funny name of a place. It means the place where maggots live.
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Rosenzweig τ 12:30, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation 83.200.34.180 07:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 15:48, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation 83.200.34.180 07:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; no response. --GPSLeo (talk) 15:48, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation 83.200.34.180 07:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; no response. --GPSLeo (talk) 15:49, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Photo or scan of a physical photo. No proof of permission. Gikü (talk) 11:59, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 15:50, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
bad quality screenshot from youtube Drakosh (talk) 12:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 15:51, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
bad quality screenshot from youtube, copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 12:59, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 15:51, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Updater500 as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: withdraw copyright permission
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as file does not qualify for speedy.-- Túrelio (talk) 07:49, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
--Jon Kolbert I am respectfully requesting again that this photo be deleted. As a new contributor at the time, I made a mistake. I have learned that the photo is owned by the university for which the individual is employed for marketing purposes. It was a miscommunication on my part as a new contributor at the time. Thank you.
{{copyvio|Professional headshot/photo owned by individual's employer/university--SEE HERE where the photo is copyrighted by the university https://photos.sfasu.edu/pages/search.php }} Updater500 (talk) 20:40, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
See here where the university owns this photo: https://photos.sfasu.edu/pages/search.php — Preceding unsigned comment added by Updater500 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
{{speedydelete|copyright violation can be found by typing subject's name in this webpage-https://photos.sfasu.edu/pages/home.php}} Updater500 (talk) 19:44, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
{{speedydelete|copyright violation can be seen by typing subject's name here in simple search box https://photos.sfasu.edu/pages/home.php}} Updater500 (talk) 19:51, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Professional headshot/photo owned by individual's employer/university. It is a copyright violation Updater500 (talk) 04:12, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, in my opinion the uploader is not a trustable user and I'll delete all his uploads as copyright violations. Taivo (talk) 10:46, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
a post-1976 photo, does not covered by the PD-Italy/PD-1996 licence — danyele 00:32, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, free in source country Italy, but copyrighted in USA. Taivo (talk) 08:09, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Available since 2010 on the internet according to TinEye CoffeeEngineer (talk) 00:33, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, small photo without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 08:19, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Toys:COM? 191.126.154.237 00:45, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted, in my opinion this is copyrighted poster. Taivo (talk) 08:22, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
a post-1976 photo, does not covered by the PD-Italy/PD-1996 licence — danyele 01:39, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, free in source country Italy, but copyrighted in USA. Taivo (talk) 08:27, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
a post-1976 photo, does not covered by the PD-Italy/PD-1996 licence — danyele 01:39, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, free in source country Italy, but copyrighted in USA. Taivo (talk) 08:29, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Tagged for speedy deletion by Veverve with the rationale "Page 3 states it has a copyright." This is apparently a modern reprint of a Russian translation of an old Greek Orthodox work. Category:The Philokalia (Church Slavonic and Russian) says that the translator is Paisius Velichkovsky (1722-1794). We will need a Russian speaker to determine whether this modern reprint contains any original copyrightable content, or whether the notice is copyfraud.
- File:Добротолюбие. Том I.pdf
- File:Добротолюбие. Том II.pdf
- File:Добротолюбие. Том III.pdf
- File:Добротолюбие. Том IV.pdf
- File:Добротолюбие. Том V.pdf
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:23, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Чръный человек: is there any way you could lend a hand? This includes everything, e.g. the publisher's logo on page 2. Veverve (talk) 04:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: The description of the files states: "This edition, typed according to the rules of modern spelling, is supplemented by a special appendix dedicated to the history of compiling the Philokalia." It looks to me that, in any case, this and the publisher's logo make it fall under copyright. Veverve (talk) 04:31, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- "В оформлении обложки использован фрагмент современной греческой иконы "Святитель Григорий Палама"" ("A fragment of a modern Greek icon "St. Gregory Palamas" was used in the design of the cover"; from the last page).
- Anyway, this 2010 books uses modern design elements and texts from publisher protected by copyright. Чръный человек (talk) 06:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, I speak Russian fluently and will delete all the files. They all have prefaces/forewords about what is written in the book. The book consists of writings of old holy men, but in addition to that we have biographies of all these holy men. The biographies and forewords are protected with copyright. Taivo (talk) 09:48, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Gikü as no permission (No permission since). Does anything in {{PD-Romania}} apply here? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:33, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, the text is not anonymous, it is signed by Ion Udrište-Olt. Doctor Google says, that he was still living in 1966, probably he died soon after that. As we have no known death year, we have also no known restore date. Taivo (talk) 11:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Shizhao as no permission (No permission since). Good-faith claim of PD-textlogo, should be discussed. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:44, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, I do not consider this a simple logo. Taivo (talk) 11:07, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by EugeneZelenko as no permission (No permission since). On the one hand, this is a high-res photo with EXIF and no evidence of previous publication. On the other hand, this user has also uploaded four low-res images of the same band with no EXIF. Pinging the deleting admin of those four, Yann, for their opinion on this image. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted, this is the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:16, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Permission is needed from whoever designed the flag. 74.98.226.71 03:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:19, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Permission is needed from whoever designed the flag. 74.98.226.71 03:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:20, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Shizhao as no permission (No permission since). COM:TOO? PD-old? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:21, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Shizhao as no permission (No permission since). COM:TOO? PD-old? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, I consider this a complex logo. Taivo (talk) 11:23, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Gikü as no permission (No permission since). Does anything in {{PD-Romania}} apply here? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:10, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept, point 4 applies, likely point 1 applies as well. Taivo (talk) 11:26, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Shizhao as no permission (No permission since). {{PD-UKGov}}? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep PD-Italy, Italy claims copyright jurisdiction on all images taken within their borders, and uses the 20 year rule. --RAN (talk) 06:10, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept, per Richard. Taivo (talk) 11:32, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Gikü as no permission (No permission since). Looks like an old map. {{PD-Romania}}? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:27, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, I do not see any year on map. If you have evidence, that the map was created not later than 1945, please present it and the file can be restored. Taivo (talk) 11:42, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Shizhao as no permission (No permission since). {{PD-UKGov}}? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:27, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep PD-UK-unknown. --RAN (talk) 06:05, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, I cannot be sure, that the photo is anonymous. Maybe photographer's name is written on backside of photo? Taivo (talk) 11:50, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
This photo was published without the consent of the subject (me). MarikoKurama35 (talk) 04:31, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept, permission from depicted person is not needed. Taivo (talk) 11:52, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Shizhao as no permission (No permission since). Is this item sufficiently flat to fall under COM:PD-Art? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:31, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept, PD-Art. Taivo (talk) 12:09, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Wikijunkie as no permission (No permission since). Original comment:
- Photo is from Germany.... Original Licence or Permission is missing! --Wikijunkie (talk) 02:46, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:33, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- A funny nomination for a photo that is over 110 years old. Definitely public domain. Arxivist (talk) 05:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, we have no photographer's name, no publication data, no evidence of anonymous work (maybe photographer's name is written on backside of photo?). That case 120 years from creation is needed and 110 years is too recent photo to keep it. Taivo (talk) 12:15, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by HapHaxion as no permission (No permission since). COM:TOO? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, this is not a simple logo. Taivo (talk) 12:18, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Invalid redirect LeonaardoG (talk) 04:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirection not needed as the file name was changed as errors.- LeonaardoG (talk) 04:43, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on creation week. Taivo (talk) 12:19, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Appears to have been copied from https://www.servite.wa.edu.au/ Not "own work" No evidence of permission from the College Mitch Ames (talk) 04:52, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Mitch, I struggled with the upload process. Please change the details of the file if necessary. I work at Servite College as you can see from the email address linked to my username. I am the Enrolments and Community Relations Officer. The logo was created by someone who used to work here. Thanks. Eckinsella (talk) 05:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- OK. Several things:
- I'm not sure your post is sufficient to fix the copyright/permissions issue (presumably the College owns the copyright), but I'll leave that to one of the Admins here to respond on that.
- Your e-mail address is not visible to other users. (This is a deliberate,and generally desirable, privacy matter.)
- I presume that you are also User:Eckinsella on English Wikipedia, editing the Servite College article. That is a problem because as an employee of the College you have a clear conflict of interest. Please read (on Wikipedia) w:WP:COI, in particular w:WP:COIEDIT. At a minimum, you should declare your conflict of interest per w:WP:DISCLOSE, but you probably ought not edit the article at all - although you are welcome to make suggestions on the article talk page. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:51, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- I've placed a note on the Servite Collage talk page (step 1 of w:WP:DISCLOSE). Mitch Ames (talk) 12:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- OK. Several things:
Deleted, complex logo, needs VRT-permission from school representative to restore it. I'll delete almost-copy file:REVISED J3970 Servite Logo Horizontal BLACK.jpg due to same reason. Taivo (talk) 12:25, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
E' già presente con un nome più corretto Walter Giannetti (talk) 06:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 12:35, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Der Fotograf wird unterschlagen, somit wohl als URV zu betrachten. Jbergner (talk) 06:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Eindeutig ein professionelles Studiofoto, ganz sicher kein Selfie, und noch viel weniger CC-Lizenz. --87.150.3.8 08:16, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, small unused personal photo without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 12:39, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
此圖為學校提供的學校校徽，然校方表示學校網站上沒有可供授權認證需要的電子郵件地址，故無法完成維基的授權認證規定 謝移獻 (talk) 07:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading week. Taivo (talk) 12:48, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by May Thu Zar Tun (talk · contribs)
[edit]images attributed to different authors in exif = copyright is suspicious.
- File:Logo-2-Rgb-Nobackground-FINAL.jpg
- File:Lucky Seafood Rice Salad.jpg
- File:All in one seafood.jpg
- File:Lucky Seafood Restaurant.jpg
- File:Myingyan.jpg
RZuo (talk) 07:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, no own work here, all copyright violations. Taivo (talk) 12:54, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighted image with no proof of ownership; see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Michelle Rowland MP.jpg Neegzistuoja (talk) 07:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, no metadata. This is the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 12:58, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation 86.212.182.247 16:00, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
Kept: insufficient reason for deletion. Don't just cast doubt, provide stronger proof. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:52, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Copyright violation 83.200.34.180 07:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted. Small photo without metadata, probably not own work as claimed. Taivo (talk) 13:06, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation 83.200.34.180 07:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, small photo without metadata, likely copyvio. Taivo (talk) 13:09, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Suspected copyright violation: file EXIF shows "Copyright holder © Phil Crean.com". MKFI (talk) 07:46, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 13:11, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
The screen capture will be own work, but what about the copyright of the news channel Al Jazeera? Wouter (talk) 07:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 13:13, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Taliban poseren in het presidentieel paleis op 15 augustus 2021, live op de nieuwszender Al Jazeera.png
[edit]
The screen capture will be own work, but what about the copyright of the news channel Al Jazeera? Wouter (talk) 07:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 13:12, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Non-Blurred Faces of People visible in highest resolution. Jvsk (talk) 09:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. I don't recall an outdoor photo ever being deleted merely because people were in the photo. Give a deletion rationale. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:14, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Even in Germany there's still Beiwerk (de minimis). -- Herbert Ortner (talk) 20:40, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. in addition, author is Jan Kube and I am not sure, that uploader Jvsk is the same person, so I'll delete the file as copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 13:16, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Old photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.
Estopedist1 (talk) 09:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep for Feliks Oorn.jpg as PD-Estonia, the other image is of the man older, and may not be less than the 70 year rule. --RAN (talk) 20:47, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm trying to get more information from these photos, but current I have origin "1954 ja 1968 Pildid Tallinna Polütehnikum"
- I'm also trying to rename the files to be more informative. Meelism (talk) 09:28, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, fotod on kaitstud autoriõigusega 70 aastat pärast autori surma. Siin pole autorit, pole ka tõendusmaterjali anonüümse töö kohta. Sihukesed fotod on Commonsi jaoks piisavalt vabad alles 120 aastat pärast loomist. Taivo (talk) 13:22, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Se zice Zavreiopseidon Marianiftode1 (talk) 10:08, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
DELETED Taivo (talk) 13:25, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Recreate after commons deletion request Axion76 (talk) 15:03, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Jameslwoodward. --Rosenzweig τ 17:50, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Photo taken from a blog with no proof of free license https://blogs.mediapart.fr/thiaba-bruni Culex (talk) 10:10, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, small photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 13:27, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
See University College Oxford Rowing Blade.svg the colour of which is correct, and orientation more orthodox Adam37 (talk) 10:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 19:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, nobody opposes, unused file. Taivo (talk) 13:29, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
accidentally created it but there was already a cropped file: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chuck_Wepner_cropped.jpg FMSky (talk) 10:35, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 13:31, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Not own work. OTRS-permission is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 10:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 13:36, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
There is no freedom of panorama in the United States. This sculpture, called "Blue Bell Cow and Girl" (2007) by Veryl Goodnight, was installed after March 1989, per COM:PACUSA. See [9]. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:07, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 13:39, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Logo has intricate geometries that fall way outside of simplicity to be acceptable without permission -- DaxServer (talk) 11:39, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 13:43, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
logo of a commercial brand under copyright gpesenti (talk) 12:08, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept, textlogos are ineligible for copyright. Taivo (talk) 13:45, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
logo of a brand under copyright (cf. https://www.feuillette.fr/mentions-legales/ ) gpesenti (talk) 12:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, surpasses threshold of originality. Taivo (talk) 13:52, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Clearly not the own work of Katy Bridle as claimed, as there is literally a watermark on the image identifying this as the work of A.P. Wilding, a London-based photographer, making this 100% a copyright violation. Devonian Wombat (talk) 12:42, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, this is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 13:55, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Fake number that not used locally Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, nobody opposes, unused file. Taivo (talk) 13:59, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
The author of this photograph is named as en:Mikhail Kaufman. Kaufman died in 1980, so this is still protected by copyright, and the file should be deleted. Copyright runs to the end of 2050, and the file can be restored in 2051. Or perhaps Kaufman worked during World War II, then the copyright runs for another four years, and the file can be restored in 2055. Rosenzweig τ 12:52, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Also included: derivative file File:Varvara Stepanova.jpg. --Rosenzweig τ 01:28, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, will be undeleted in 2055, because author worked during WWII. Taivo (talk) 14:04, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Per COM:FOP SK, there is no freedom of panorama in South Korea for buildings. ✗plicit 13:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, this is the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 14:06, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
This image has been uploaded twice by the same user - only one upload is necessary Klondike53226 (talk) 14:04, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, copy of file:Manitoba Winnipeg Jets Heritage licence plate.jpg. Taivo (talk) 07:06, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Historical publications. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:29, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 07:41, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
1) COM:DW of sculpture for upper left (no FOP per COM:FOP Honduras) and 2) no attribution of any of the images--user has history of copyvio collages (see File:Collage Choloma.jpg) Эlcobbola talk 14:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, this is the user's last remaining upload. Taivo (talk) 08:34, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
No evidence of PD or a free license. TODOS OS DIREITOS RESERVADOS at https://dre.pt/ Xunks (talk) 14:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Xunks. All publications made by state organizations in Portugal may be used freely, as long as appropriate credit is given. This is ruled by No 5.1 of Resolução do Conselho de Ministros n.º 95/99, de 25 de agosto:
- "5.1 - Toda a informação disponibilizada na Internet pelas entidades referidas no n.º 1 pode ser livremente utilizada pelo público que a ela acede, desde que se faça menção da respectiva fonte."
- (5.1 - All information made available on the Internet by the entities referred to in paragraph 1 may be freely used by the public that accesses it, provided that the respective source is mentioned.). JonJon86 (talk) 08:17, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, let's look point 1.2 of the mentioned law. The law applies only for things published after 1999 or used in 1999. Now look this map. It was created in 1967, considerably earlier. Seems like the map has lost its importance in 1999. Author pt:Ulisses Cortês died in 1975. The map is protected in source country Portugal until 2046 (70+1 years from death) and in USA until 2063 (95+1 years from publication). Taivo (talk) 09:24, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from background. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, per {{FoP-Poland}}, freedom of panorama applies only for things permanently situating in public places. These screens are likely not permanent and definitely museum is not a public place. Taivo (talk) 09:32, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright for Belgian stamps is 70 years after the death of the artist/engraver. In this case the artists, Steven Wilsens and Paul Huybrechts, haven't been dead for 70 years. So in no way is this in the public domain. Adamant1 (talk) 15:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, as Steven Wilsens is still living, we have no known restore date. Taivo (talk) 09:49, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright for Belgian stamps is 70 years after the death of the artist/engraver. In this case the artist, Paul Huybrechts, is still alive. So in no way is this in the public domain. Adamant1 (talk) 15:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 09:52, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Poorly designed piece of amateur fan art, which was uploaded as illustration for a BLP that has been deleted for lacking credible or reliably sourced notability claims. While it was technically uploaded CC by its own creator, it has no encyclopedic value and no potential for reuse -- even if the BLP were somehow keepable or recreatable in the future, a sloppy line scribble with the subject's name under it would still be a completely inappropriate way to illustrate it. Bearcat (talk) 15:29, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as not useful in any way. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 19:44, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, the portrait is so bad, that it can be taken as vandalism. Taivo (talk) 09:54, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Roemerstrasse karte.jpg (identical base map, differently cropped). Atrocious when used as thumbnail; now unused Enyavar (talk) 15:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 09:59, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jules123123andres (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos and screengrabs, missing essential info: original author, source, date, and permission.
- File:L4B.jpg
- File:L4C2.jpg
- File:Los lazos.jpg
- File:Las cuatro brujas.jpg
- File:Pareja de cueca.png
- File:Huaso Chileno 1.jpg
- File:Club Hipico en los años 30.jpg
- File:Los Cuatro cuartos.jpg
- File:R-5109183-1384808392-5604.jpg
P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 10:13, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright for stamps of Belgium is either 70 years after the publication date or death of the artist. In this case, neither has passed. So this stamp isn't in the public domain. I'm also nominating the following files for the same reason:
- File:BEL 1968 MiNr1513 pm B002.jpg
- File:BEL 1968 MiNr1514 pm B002.jpg
- File:BEL 1968 MiNr1515 pm B002.jpg
- File:Stamp of Rwanda - 1969 - Colnect 258455 - Quarry Worker - Oscar Bonnevalle.jpeg
Adamant1 (talk) 15:41, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, will be undeleted in 2065 (95+1 years from publication per COM:URAA). Taivo (talk) 10:21, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from advertisement. Should be cropped/blanked to keep. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:43, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, per {{FoP-Israel}}, freedom of panorama in Israel applies only for objects permanently situating in public place. Advertisements are not permanent, so I cropped it out. Taivo (talk) 10:36, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Picture of a Blue Origin sign. No indication that the sign content is free to use. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 15:47, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete. Just realized this by now. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 15:50, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, license laundering. Taivo (talk) 10:45, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Me equivoqué = ( Dessiré Gabriel Tenorio (talk) 15:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 10:49, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
no source given Hoyanova (talk) 07:35, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Hoyanova There is no source here, these are people from the urban-type settlement "Gelon", the photo was taken by me personally from the archives of our photographs, like the 2 man in the pictures in the article about the Village of Gelon Ukraina12 (talk) 07:57, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Looks like authors own work. --Sanandros (talk) 19:07, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Previous DR closed wrong. It is clearly a photo of an existing photo, per comments of uploader above ("photo was taken by me personally from the archives of our photographs"). Needs original author, source, date, and permission. Also included the uncropped version:
P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- The question is whether it predates 1972 to be PD in Uzbekistan. --RAN (talk) 17:08, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- If the required essential info is added, then that would be answered by itself.
- BTW, I see you frequently changing essential info and licenses without any basis for doing so, just based on assumptions or your personal opinion. That is plain wrong and must stop. If you think a license is incorrect, you can discuss it at the DR but don't change licenses in the middle of a DR. That is deceptive and manipulative for the DR discussion! --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:05, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Either keep, or explain why an image of this age isn't PD, or some plausible claim that this isn't an old image, as claimed. But it's ludicrous to base this on the licensing of a 2022 scan / mechanical reproduction of an old photo, and even worse to claim that this photo just happens to have been photographed originally in the last few months. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Ukraina12: Can you help us out here and expand anything on the description of the original photo? Date, location, photographer? Anything would be helpful, thanks. If this is your original photo (not the digital scan of the film) would you consider also licensing it as something like {{CC-by-sa-4.0}}? That might just be simpler. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:29, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- The claim that this image is "circa 1960" was added User:RAN, an unrelated editor who knows nothing more about this image than you or me. IMO, it is equal to vandalism to just put an arbitrary date out of thin air! Yes, I know that the 2022 is clearly wrong, that is why this DR was started in the first place. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 23:38, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- You know that "2022 is clearly wrong" and yet you're edit-warring over two different editors to keep re-adding such a falsehood. This isn't about accuracy, it's just about your ego. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:05, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- My ego??? Where did that come from??? No need to make it personal. And replacing one wrong date with another wrong date is not helpful, and actually misleading, because other participants in this DR may not check the file history and then just assume that PD-Uzbekistan is right. That is why the original info should remain until the original uploader can provide the facts. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:12, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep This seems to be an analog photograph. So pre-1972 is quite probable. Of course, more information would be better. Yann (talk) 15:35, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- It is unbecoming of an admin to make such an assumption out of thin air! Without the essential info, there is just no way to know if PD-Uzbekistan is even correct. Was it even taken in Uzbekistan? Was the photographer really anonymous? Is it actually old or just faded? One fact is clear: the uploader took it from an archive. So (s)he should go back and get those essential facts. That is a Commons policy requirement. I am more than willing to keep this image if someone can provide that. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 03:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Get off from your high horse, and find a way to keep this, instead of finding a pretext to delete it. Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:48, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Why the personal stuff? Hekerui (talk) 21:30, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep --Ooligan (talk) 22:03, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- I would suggest getting information from the uploader about the original picture, because the copyright of that picture is in question, not the license of the scan. However, the user is globally locked for spam. Yes, there is no source beyond the uploader that this is Uzbekistan but I don't have a good reason to doubt it. If it were in the public domain in the US and the source country then Template:cc-by-sa-4.0 is fine. But as it is ww have only a claim about the scan, no information on the original picture and no basis for speculating it's old (although it might be), so delete per COM:PRP. Hekerui (talk) 21:30, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted. Look, we do not know anything about the photo. How can you be sure, that the photo is made before 1972? We have no author, no publication data, no anything. Uploader is globally locked as spam-only account. Taivo (talk) 10:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright for stamps of Belgium is either 70 years after the publication date or death of the artist. In this case, neither has passed. So this stamp isn't in the public domain. Adamant1 (talk) 16:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:00, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright for stamps of Belgium is either 70 years after the publication date or death of the artist. In this case, neither has passed. So this stamp isn't in the public domain. Adamant1 (talk) 16:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, will be undeleted in 2065 (95+1 years from publication per URAA). Taivo (talk) 11:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyright for stamps of Belgium is either 70 years after the publication date or death of the artist. In this case, neither has passed. So this stamp isn't in the public domain. Adamant1 (talk) 16:29, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, will be undeleted in 2032 (anonymous work, 70+1 years from publication). Taivo (talk) 11:04, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Bogus CC-Self claim. Erick Soares3 (talk) 16:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Since Coralina (see that there's no free image of her) died in 1985, at least is Undelete in 2056. Erick Soares3 (talk) 16:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep PD-Brazil-Photo ordinary portraiture up to 1989 was not copyrightable in Brazil. When you scan an old photo, the derivative copy you make, is your own work, even if it does not transfer the original copyright to you. --RAN (talk) 17:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- There's any evidence that the uploader scanned this image? There's several examples of this image being used on Google, so I find highly questionable that he had the original and didn't copied from anywhere else, specially that the uploader already claimed copyright where he didn't had none in the past. Erick Soares3 (talk) 12:17, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept, I will change authorship data. Taivo (talk) 11:12, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive paper DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright startus? Drakosh (talk) 17:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:19, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:23, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:24, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Комсостав Брестского партизанского соединения Н,В, Сенькин, П.В. Пронягин, Н.В. Бобков..jpg
[edit]
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:25, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:28, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:29, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:30, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
File:У костра сидят командиры Брестского партизанского соединения П.В. Пронягин, С.Е. Егоров, Д.И. Дудко..jpg
[edit]
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:32, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:37, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:36, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:35, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:38, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:41, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:42, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:43, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:45, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:46, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:48, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Family photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:49, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:50, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:17, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:52, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Family photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:17, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:53, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:17, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:55, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:17, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:59, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 12:05, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 12:06, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
archive photo DW, no original author, source, date. Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 17:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 12:07, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio. Dronebogus (talk) 21:47, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ✗plicit 07:14, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Still a copyvio, don’t predict this being used educationally anyway Dronebogus (talk) 21:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ✗plicit 07:14, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio. A US film from 1988 cannot have fallen into the public domain because it’s neither old enough nor applicable under “PD-licensing not renewed” or “PD-pre 1977, no copyright notice” Dronebogus (talk) 21:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 07:19, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by GraciTopCat (talk · contribs)
[edit]No evidence any of these are PD/freely licensed
- File:Eduardo Arozamena-1a1.webp
- File:Eduardo Arozamena por Salvador Nájar.jpg
- File:Mimí Bechelani de la Peña.webp
Dronebogus (talk) 21:59, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, you're allowed to delete them. They're already taken from their respective Wikipedia pages. GraciTopCat (talk) 00:12, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 07:20, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Official band photo [10], not created by Tainan City Government. Wcam (talk) 13:59, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination, missing permission. --Wdwd (talk) 09:32, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This is the same non-free license as the one being discussed here, which only permits personal and non-profit use and prohibits modification. Wcam (talk) 17:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- From 爪爪不能亡's upload log, he have been uploaded such files over the years. I suggest you warn the uploader for uploading unfree files that he may be blocked indefinitely.--Kai3952 (talk) 21:40, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted. Taivo (talk) 08:17, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
foto caricata 2 volte Luisella Pala (talk) 17:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading week. Taivo (talk) 08:24, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
low quality images, no real use, taken by a minor of other minors and unlikely to ever be of use.
- File:Waikiki Beach 2018.jpg
- File:Thoma's Meat Market.jpg
- File:Kids In Table.jpg
- File:Girl in the Tent.jpg
- File:Kids In Online Class.jpg
Praxidicae (talk) 17:43, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep 2nd photo, as a photo of a meat counter could have an educational purpose, although a personality rights template should be added. It's reasonable to delete the rest per nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:25, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, but I keep 2 photos due to educational value. Taivo (talk) 08:40, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
File:Govind Dholakia received “Prestigious Leadership Award” from U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) in 2017.jpg
[edit]_in_2017.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_in_2017.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Uploader may be the subject, but they didn't take this photograph. It's credited in EXIF to David Aleman, with no evidence of permission. Lord Belbury (talk) 19:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 08:53, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work. Yann (talk) 19:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 08:56, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
blady msipelled personal fantasy map: compare ethnic distribution like in File:Major ethnic groups of Pakistan in 1980 borders removed.jpg and also check on the legal status of Pashtunistan in Pakistan - I see no factual basis for this map. Enyavar (talk) 20:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 15:29, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, this is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 08:58, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Cropped picture of an unknown origin, No educational value CoffeeEngineer (talk) 20:51, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, this is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 08:59, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Advertising, blog with dubious intent CoffeeEngineer (talk) 20:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, this is the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 09:01, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Screenshot of a video not in Creative Commons https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNSTGKWqFWE CoffeeEngineer (talk) 21:03, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Certainement, vous avez raison. Azickry (talk) 09:38, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 09:03, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Screenshot of a video not in Creative Commons https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNSTGKWqFWE CoffeeEngineer (talk) 21:06, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 09:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
It is unlikely that Microsoft released this under the CC BY-SA 4.0. Also, Word is not free software, so this file is non-free per Commons:Screenshots. I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk) 21:46, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ah yes you can delete that. Squarcillow (talk) 01:27, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, as the uploader also agrees to delete, I do not start to research threshold of originality. Taivo (talk) 09:08, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Charming, but potentially a copyvio and outside of realistic scope Dronebogus (talk) 21:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, this is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 09:10, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Émile Oscar Guillaume died in 1954. No freedom of panorama in France. 2A01:CB00:A05:D100:CD36:8569:C6F6:711E 21:55, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, sculptor's copyright expires in 2025 (70+1 years from death). USA demands 95 years from publication, but as this is 1925 sculpture, 95 years have already passed. Another problem is photographer's copyright. It's an old postcard. No photographer's data, no even photo creation data, so we have no known undeletion date. Taivo (talk) 09:14, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Edit of a copyrighted image. Non-informative. EatTrainCode (talk) 21:59, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @EatTrainCode, could you explain what copyrighted image was being edited? The page says that it's a combination of two public domain images (one from 1924 and one from the US federal government). WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:35, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- I can't see any reason to delete this. One of the essential aspects of our image licensing is that people are free to use them to produce derivative images, including composites of multiple source images. The fact that this is a composite is clearly explained in the description, but given the controversial topic, I suggest it be renamed to File:Armed teacher in classroom (composite image).png to eliminate any confusion.
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Kept, now the photo is correctly sourced. Taivo (talk) 09:19, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Émile Oscar Guillaume died in 1954. No freedom of panorama in France. 2A01:CB00:A05:D100:CD36:8569:C6F6:711E 21:59, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, in addition, this is an old postcard, we have neither photographer's data nor photo creation year. Taivo (talk) 09:24, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Émile Oscar Guillaume died in 1954. No freedom of panorama in France. 2A01:CB00:A05:D100:CD36:8569:C6F6:711E 22:04, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, I delete a lot of uploads of Rolbig (talk · contribs) due to same reason. Taivo (talk) 09:32, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Logo with no evidence of free release. I believe this exceeds the threshold of originality, but am not 100% sure. Bilorv (talk) 22:59, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, this is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 09:42, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
There is no proof this is a work of the *federal* US government. This archived page is the source of the photo in question, and it is an obituary which does not attribute the photo to anyone. It could be a personal portrait or be a Mississippi government portrait. Fordice never worked for the federal government, so there's no reason to think this would be a federal photo. Mississippi government works are not automatically in the public domain Indy beetle (talk) 23:51, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 09:44, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
VRT-permission from copyright holder Davies Marko is needed. Taivo (talk) 13:25, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:28, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Eien20 as no permission (No permission since) Atsme Talk 📧 14:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:29, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
