Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2022/08/22
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
Files uploaded by Nguhanhkimphap (talk · contribs)
[edit]Nearly identical COM:PENIS spam
- File:Nguhanhkiem.jpg
- File:Nguhanhkiemphap.jpg
- File:Tamdao.jpg
- File:Anh chupjpg.jpg
- File:Anh chupjpg2.jpg
- File:Ảnh chụp jpg.jpg
Dronebogus (talk) 00:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:29, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Nguhanhkimphap (talk · contribs)
[edit]Poor quality COM:PENIS and potential copyvios: Watermark (File:4CDA9A8B-8876-4473-A854-B96181C564F.jpg) and black bars (screenshot?) (File:75F22AE3-8DA1-4A4B-8D3E-9A6C5B7812E.jpg)
- File:75F22AE3-8DA1-4A4B-8D3E-9A6C5B7812E.jpg
- File:859134EF-8E8D-468F-8137-EEÊ37B402B2.jpg
- File:DB9F2849-45BA-4781-8E24-81462532712.jpg
- File:4CDA9A8B-8876-4473-A854-B96181C564F.jpg
Nutshinou Talk! 15:40, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --FitIndia Semi-retired 06:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Low quality COM:PORN Dronebogus (talk) 00:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Pi.1415926535 at 03:29, 22 August 2022 UTC: nuking per COM:PENIS --Krdbot 07:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
request by uploader Sebastian Wallroth (talk) 08:53, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 12:50, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
File:Hugo Coya y los premios nacionales de periodismo. Reconocimiento. Luis Cáceres Álvarez.jpg
[edit]I made a mistake uploading the file Elbrujodelascalles (talk) 13:28, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 15:07, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
accidental upload/duplicate 1960nerds (talk) 13:56, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 15:19, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Ferdousi Begum Ferdousi (talk) 15:13, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Info: Uploaded 7 months ago, in use on 4 projects. --Achim55 (talk) 15:48, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Speedy delete The image is taken from the subject's Instagram account, the photo posted a month before the uploader created the file: https://www.instagram.com/p/CXmFg3ivLI_/?hl=en Adeletron 3030 (talk) 16:26, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violation, found elsewhere on the web and unlikely to be own work (F1). --Эlcobbola talk 16:59, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
empty image 5.165.135.41 19:41, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Intended: Empty page of a hosted book. --Achim55 (talk) 19:45, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work. 91.193.177.76 14:22, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio at 20:31, 22 August 2022 UTC: Copyright violation: http://metalkings.org/reports/5743/113182 --Krdbot 07:37, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Unknown license and unknown source Magnatyrannus (talk) 15:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio at 20:29, 22 August 2022 UTC: Copyright violation: http://ornitofrenia.pl/ptaki/kohorta-charadriia/nadrzad-charadriimorphae/page/12/ --Krdbot 07:37, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio of Pol Bury work, see my question on Village Pump. Miniwark (talk) 12:29, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Better to do a batch DR. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:25, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Probably copied from a tourism website [1] Boylarva99 (talk) 17:48, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Delete This photo appears with identical name and size at img-62a75891bdaa8.jpg, at [2], so that is the most likely proximate source. Shutterstock indicates that this photo is a rights-controlled photo ID #1548361 by Jessica Bethke. —RP88 (talk) 22:43, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Obvious copyvio. --Yann (talk) 09:19, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
copyvio of a 2020 poster for a show in Belgium Culex (talk) 12:25, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Herbythyme at 11:27, 24 August 2022 UTC: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing --Krdbot 13:53, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work, looks like screenshot. 91.193.177.76 14:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Herbythyme at 11:27, 24 August 2022 UTC: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing --Krdbot 13:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
OOS garbage Dronebogus (talk) 00:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:29, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
OOS garbage Dronebogus (talk) 00:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:29, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
OOS garbage Dronebogus (talk) 00:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:29, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
No evidence of notability Dronebogus (talk) 00:42, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
No evidence of notability Dronebogus (talk) 00:46, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by FrannyOfficially (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal project with no evidence of notability
Dronebogus (talk) 00:46, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
No evidence of notability Dronebogus (talk) 00:47, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Seem to be made-up creations with no basis in reality or notable fiction.
- File:PAK Army Alt. Emblem 2.png
- File:PAK Army Alt. Emblem.png
- File:PAK NS Emblem Gav.png
- File:PAK NS Flag V4.jpg
- File:PAK NS Flag V3.jpg
- File:PAK UNICORN RED.png
- File:PAK UNICORN.png
- File:PAK MUGHAL FLAG.jpg
- File:PAK INTEL ISI.png
- File:PAK NS INTELLIGENCE V2.png
- File:PAK NS INTELLIGENCE.png
- File:Pakistan National Socialist Army Tamgha V1.png
- File:Pakistani National Socialist Army Tamgha.png
- File:National Socialist Pakistan Army Flag.jpg
- File:National Socialist Pakistan Flag V3.jpg
- File:Pakistani National Socialist War Flag.jpg
- File:Pak NS Flag 2.jpg
- File:Pak NS Flag.jpg
- File:Pakistani Swastika Flag Bordered.jpg
- File:Indus (Pakistani) Coinage Emblem.png
- File:Hypothetical greater Indus state (or greater Pakistan).jpg
- File:National Bolshevik Pakistan Flag Variant 2.jpg
- File:National Bokshevik Pakistan.jpg
- File:Mughal Nazbol Fantasy.jpg
Dronebogus (talk) 00:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Non-notable personal doodle Dronebogus (talk) 00:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:37, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Inaccurate map, OOS and anti-educational Dronebogus (talk) 00:56, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete --Orijentolog (talk) 08:21, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:30, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Low quality and not obviously useful Dronebogus (talk) 00:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:30, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 04:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:05, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused logo. Lymantria (talk) 06:53, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:06, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Out of project scope: Unused logo. Lymantria (talk) 06:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:06, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
{{BadJPG}}, orphaned/replaced by SVG version. Leyo 09:42, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. We have File:2,4,5-Trimetil-3-propilheksan.svg as high-quality replacement. — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 08:37, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:14, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
{{BadJPG}}, orphaned/replaced by SVG version. Leyo 09:42, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. We have File:2,3,5-Trimetilheksan.svg as high-quality replacement. — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 08:34, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:14, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Selfie of non-contributor Guerillero Parlez Moi 12:16, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Not realistically useful for an educational purpose Guerillero Parlez Moi 12:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:22, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
unused personal photo — Draceane talkcontrib. 13:44, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:08, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
unused personal photo — Draceane talkcontrib. 13:44, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:08, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by MichaelLlana (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal images that are outside the scope of this project.
- File:Michael Llana from his instagram.jpg
- File:Michael Llana from his 29th birthday.jpg
- File:Michael Llana from his brother's apartment.jpg
- File:Late at night evening going back to home.jpg
Herby talk thyme 13:56, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:09, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
unused and out of scope drawing Ske (talk) 14:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:16, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:27, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:15, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos. Should be in SVG if useful.
- File:IRIB IRINN (2) 2022.jpg
- File:Irib Varzesh (2) TV Channel on Telewebion.png
- File:Irib Varzesh (2) TV Channel on Telewebion 2022.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:29, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 01:24, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:15, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Outside of COM:SCOPE. If this little bit of text were to be needed anywhere, it should be text rather than a PDF file. Marbletan (talk) 16:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:17, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Taikoo1997 (talk · contribs)
[edit]A person's imaginary election results, probably a https://www.reddit.com/r/imaginaryelections thing. Out of COM:SCOPE for Commons as being of no use to anyone else.
Lord Belbury (talk) 18:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:18, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Taikoo1997 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Two more out of COM:SCOPE imaginary election results.
Lord Belbury (talk) 09:14, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 14:28, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
I see no educational purpose for the image Magnatyrannus (talk) 20:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:21, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
No educational purpose Magnatyrannus (talk) 20:19, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:21, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo, no cleary educational value and doubtful copyright claim. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 23:08, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:23, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Vandalismo Aitorembe (talk) 23:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:24, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Not own work. It is an old postcard LuCKY 💬 ✒️ 📂 21:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, DW, not old enough to be PD. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:35, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
obvious reason BrianHals (talk) 21:46, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per prompt uploader request. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:34, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
This file, taken from flickr, has incorrect licensing. The flickr license is Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC 2.0). Since this is noncommercial, this is incompatible with Wikimedia Commons Indy beetle (talk) 22:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; false license claim. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:33, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
This file, taken from flickr, has incorrect licensing. The flickr license is Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic (CC BY-NC 2.0). Since this is noncommercial, this is incompatible with Wikimedia Commons. Indy beetle (talk) 22:55, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:33, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
porn image Frédéric-FR (talk) 07:46, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Keep Not porn, nudity. We have over 1,000 images of penis closeups, welcome to Commons. --RAN (talk) 15:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Human anatomy and sexuality are within project scope, so that alone is not a reason for deletion. Fairly well photographed, no consensus to delete. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:29, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Indicated screenshot per Metadata, possibly grabbed from a porn site/social media website A1Cafel (talk) 06:44, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Metadata says "screenshot". -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:00, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Kadı Message 14:12, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Potential copyright infringement Throughthemind (talk) 10:07, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination (I would have used the term "Blatant" rather than "Potential"). --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:30, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Potential copyright infringement Throughthemind (talk) 10:07, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:31, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Similar to recent nomination for deletion of files uploaded by this user, the images are lacking information to determine copyright status. Images are extremely unlikely to be CC-BY-SA licensed, and the question is whether they are in public domain. However, no author and source given as "Senate judiciary comittee" is not helpful. Gag0409 (talk) 20:02, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Jameslwoodward at 15:09, 27 August 2022 UTC: per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by MIAJudges --Krdbot 19:31, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Porque este archivo se trata de mi y lo he creado yo, por eso quiero eliminarlo. Payen Peterson (talk) 06:07, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Archivo equivocado, debe eliminar de imediato Jeff Promo (talk) 02:00, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: No author, no source, no license. --Achim55 (talk) 06:14, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Debe ser borrado porque el propietario no quiere que este en internet. Kervenspierre (talk) 00:17, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Redeleted. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:04, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
{{BadJPG}}, replaced by File:Hexan 2.svg. Leyo 09:33, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 14:53, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
{{BadJPG}}, replaced by File:Heptan.svg. Leyo 09:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 14:53, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
{{BadJPG}}, orphaned/replaced by SVG version. Leyo 09:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 14:53, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
{{BadJPG}}, orphaned/replaced by SVG version. Leyo 09:37, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 14:52, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
{{BadJPG}}, orphaned/replaced by SVG version. Leyo 09:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 14:52, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
{{BadJPG}}, orphaned/replaced by SVG version. Leyo 09:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 14:52, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
{{BadJPG}}, orphaned/replaced by SVG version. Leyo 09:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 14:52, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
{{BadJPG}}, orphaned/replaced by SVG version. Leyo 09:41, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 14:52, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded the photo and I think I violated some copyrights. Please delete the photo. Wiseuseraze (talk) 13:59, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 08:34, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
No evidence of educational value, source map may be copyrighted Dronebogus (talk) 00:50, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio (map). --Wdwd (talk) 08:36, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
accidental duplicate of File:John Shirley Wood (1888–1966) at West Point in 1912.png Nick Number (talk) 01:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 09:52, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
File:Opinion of First President of the National Council of the Republic of Slovakia Frantisek Miklosko on Artsakh and people of Artsakh.jpg
[edit]Probable copyright violation, photograph of a magazine with no indication of a free license in the image Verbcatcher (talk) 02:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 09:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Unused smaller and poorer-format version of File:Dicyclohexylurea.png. The replacement also has better geometry at the nitrogens. DMacks (talk) 03:20, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Leyo 08:30, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Low-quality poor-geometry missing-stereochemistry. Have several higher quality options in Category:Carnosine DMacks (talk) 03:24, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Leyo 08:28, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
I no longer want to use this username Kukilgogoi (talk) 13:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Request an account rename if you want another user name. --Rosenzweig τ 18:06, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
zmiana nazwy November P (talk) 17:12, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: we usually keep redirects. --Rosenzweig τ 18:08, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Resume/CV for non-notable individual. Outside of COM:SCOPE. Marbletan (talk) 17:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 18:09, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
File:Kemburu Sateesh Kumar is an Indian businessman, former media professional known for his work in ad films, documentaries. He is currently the Chairman and Managing Director of Scintilla Kreations Pvt Ltd.pdf
[edit]Resume/CV for non-notable individual. Outside of COM:SCOPE. Marbletan (talk) 17:47, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 18:09, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
File:According to Social media this is the lead singer he refers to himself as Revenantpuppet.jpg
[edit]Possible copyvio: Picture from Youtube and Spotify CoffeeEngineer (talk) 15:53, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Andrei Romanenko (talk) 19:56, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
Does not mett criterias + multi-wiki spam (tried to create stubs on Wikipédia FR, Wikiquote FR and Wikidata). Eunostos (talk) 10:59, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:09, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighted picture from wwe. Com HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:06, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:09, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
it's an advert Tagishsimon (talk) 11:26, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Blatant advertisement. Marbletan (talk) 15:23, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:10, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
This image is from Facebook and there's zero evidence that it's released under a free license. So it should be deleted as copyvio unless we can obtain COM:VRT permission from the original photographer. Adamant1 (talk) 11:27, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:10, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
The image is from PicsArt and is watermarked. So it's likely copyvio unless the original photographer can provide COM:VRT permission for Commons to host it. Same goes for File:Hoo naufragante sesión de fotos 3.jpg and File:Hoo naufragante sesión de fotos Coyoacán.jpg. Adamant1 (talk) 11:29, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:11, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Album cover for a modern soundtrack. So clearly COPYVIO unless the uploader can provide evidence to the contrary. Adamant1 (talk) 11:49, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:12, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Modern album cover and there's zero evidence it's released under a free license or otherwise hostable on Commons. So it should be deleted as COPYVIO. Adamant1 (talk) 11:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:12, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Image comes from a commercial website for a record label and there's zero evidence it's released under a free license. So COPYVIO. Adamant1 (talk) 11:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:11, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
It's extremely doubtful this is the uploaders own work or that it's otherwise released under a free license. Otherwise, they should provide COM:VRT permission for Commons to host it. Adamant1 (talk) 12:07, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:12, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Album cover CoffeeEngineer (talk) 15:48, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 11:38, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio. Dronebogus (talk) 00:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Speedy delete Twitter bird is not free, and can be used only if it was released under a Free license.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Alejitao123 (talk • contribs) 14:02, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:49, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:33, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: F10. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 02:34, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work of copyrighted artwork per COM:PACKAGING. Rosenzweig τ 04:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellywa (talk) 22:10, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
surely not "ownsource", logo above ToO — Draceane talkcontrib. 07:00, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 14:52, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:42, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 13:30, 12 October 2022 UTC: CSD F10 (personal photos out of COM:SCOPE --Krdbot 18:52, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
No meaningful content Dronebogus (talk) 00:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - Do we usually delete (nearly) blank userpages on Commons? I don't see anything at Commons:Deletion_policy to suggest that's the norm. This one does have a teeny bit of page history. Ajpolino (talk) 02:32, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
User page blanked; no requirement to delete that I can see. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:03, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
No evidence of notability Dronebogus (talk) 00:50, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, apparent personal vanity design. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:04, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
This person can be identified: https://blog.drmartens.com/diy-docs-marcus-motion/ However, I doubt if he is notable enough. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 00:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, unused, poor quality, OOS. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:07, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
The template says that User:FlickreviewR had confirmed cc-by-sa-2.0 at Flickr at the moment of upload. However, there is "All Rights Reserved" in the EXIF - isn't it controversial? Andrei Romanenko (talk) 00:59, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don't know whether there is a controversy there, but IMO the least restrictive choice should control. Therefore, Keep (unless there was a consensus on this problem somewhere else and they disagreed with me). —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Confirmed free license at time of upload. Name on EXIF matches Flickr uploader. Presumably "All Rights Reserved" is default setting in their EXIF, and does not apply when they chose to share individual photos of theirs under free licenses. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:10, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
This is labeled as an "own work". It is highly unlikely that a Wikipedia user was the original photographer of a man who died in 1950 (and based off the subject's age, the photo was clearly taken before this point). This is likely a copyvio Indy beetle (talk) 02:24, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- "Wikipedia user was the original photographer", when you create a derivative image by scanning or cropping an original image, it is your own work, just not going to get a new copyright. You can just fix errors, "PD-US" for an image from circa 1910. --RAN (talk) 17:05, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- That only works if the photo was published in the US before 1927 or thereafter without copyright renewal and such. We have zero proof of that and don't really know where this comes from. I have never seen someone claim an "original" work by simply cropping a headshot, but that doesn't matter anyway since we don't know what the original source is. "Subject is old dead guy" is not a licensing permission. -Indy beetle (talk) 22:30, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Seeing as this is what he looked like in 1913, it is doubtful this photo is really from around 1910 either, probably later. -Indy beetle (talk) 20:21, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
- That only works if the photo was published in the US before 1927 or thereafter without copyright renewal and such. We have zero proof of that and don't really know where this comes from. I have never seen someone claim an "original" work by simply cropping a headshot, but that doesn't matter anyway since we don't know what the original source is. "Subject is old dead guy" is not a licensing permission. -Indy beetle (talk) 22:30, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Two different photos, neither of them with sourcing sufficient to allow assessment of copyright status. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:14, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
This file is incorrectly treated as PD-USG but it is not freely licensable. The Air Force photograph of the file itself does not provoke copyright concerns but the original design (and the specific instantiation here) was only temporarily licensed to the United States Government, it was never given completely. you can read a copy of the letter sent to the USG here (there is another archived at pbs.org but that page is cumbersome to read). The image itself is still copyright Walt Disney and the Walt Disney company. A version has been uploaded to en.wp with a fair use rationale for the two places on en.wp where it is currently used. Protonk (talk) 03:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Clear Disney copyright notice; no indication offered that license was transfered to US Gov. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:16, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Mohammad Ali Al-e-Hashem
[edit]No evidence that these files actually fall into the public domain; they were taken in the 1980s, but not necessarily published.
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (01).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (02).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (03).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (04).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (05).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (06).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (07).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (08).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (09).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (10).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (11).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (12).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (13).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (14).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (15).jpg
- File:Mohammad Ali Ale-Hashem during Iran-Iraq War (16).jpg
Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:20, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
They are also freely licensed as works of Tasnim news, see the Tasnim watermark in the corner. And since there are no higher-resolution version or earlier-published versions of these photos online, they are actually works by Tasnim News Agency, not stolen photos. Streamline8988 (talk) 03:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per Streamline8988; As far as I can see, correct. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:17, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Suspected copyvio: larger-resolution version in Dallas Observer 2020-02-07 credited to Herndon herself. User has one other upload, also under nom for postdating online source. SamuelRiv (talk) 03:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:18, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Suspected copyvio: similar-resolution version in Rehumanize International Twitter post 2019-12-07 that is actually from their winter 2018 rally. User has one other upload, also under nom for postdating online source. SamuelRiv (talk) 03:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:19, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ankitpandey8573 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Copied from various online articles about Redmi Note 7 camera (e.g. 4 March 2019 and 7 March 2019. All mislabeled as "Sawaraj Bhavan", lack metadata, low-res etc.
- File:Sawaraj bhawan road.jpg
- File:Sawaraj bhawan upper part.jpg
- File:Sawaraj bhawan by redmi camera.jpg
- File:Sawaraj bhawan river side.jpg
- File:Sawaraj bhawan green.jpg
- File:Statue of Sawaraj Wisdom.jpg
- File:Sawaraj bhawan.jpg
- File:Sawaraj Bhawan.jpg
Utcursch (talk) 05:19, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:19, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 220.211.26.224 as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: This file not CC
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as no evidence was provided. -- Túrelio (talk) 08:13, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Reverse image search apparent copyviol from Twitter. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:21, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-1990-1201-009, 1. FC Lok Leipzig - FC Hansa Rostock 3-2 (cropped).jpg
[edit]requested by uploader Sebastian Wallroth (talk) 08:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Comment It's used by Wikidata. --Rosenzweig τ 12:49, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: deletion requested by uploader within minutes of upload. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Njd-de as no permission (No permission since). Converting to DR as the uploader replied on their talk page but nobody saw the reply. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:05, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Dark Angel23490: The photographer must send a free license release to us by email. They can find the form on COM:RELGEN, and once it is completed, they can send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:06, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per above; no apparent progress on permission. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:23, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by LMLM as no permission (No permission since). COM:TOO? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:52, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, false license claim. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:24, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Logo isn't below the threshold of originality. So the file should be deleted as COPYVIO. Adamant1 (talk) 12:01, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, false license, false claims. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:25, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
The drawing above the depicted person in green is probably still in copyright. As it's obviously not installed permanently, the photo is not covered by Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Poland#Freedom of panorama. -- Túrelio (talk) 09:52, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:40, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Not realistically useful for an educational purpose; logo of a non-notable company uploaded by a COI account Guerillero Parlez Moi 12:17, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:41, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Unidentified place, even country is unknown. Bad quality. That way the photo is out of project scope. Small photo without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 18:22, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:41, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Challenged SD. This guy is notable: es:Brayan Gil Hurtado. However, the original photograph has been heavily modified and it is unclear if the uploader was a photogapher or only a Photoshop user. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 01:45, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:44, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
The linked article claims that the depicted person died in 1397 of the Hijri Calendar (2022 of the Gregorian calendar). It does not make any claim as to when the photograph was taken or when the photographer died. If the image was taken in 1951, per the description, the creator would have had to have died the next year for PD-70 to be true. Guerillero Parlez Moi 12:02, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:39, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
Cropped from https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/2021/07/23/olympic-refugee-team-uncertainty-opening-ceremonies/ - needs OTRS Gbawden (talk) 12:42, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:39, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
This is not a work of the US Government. It was taken by Joseph Moran on November 3, 2014, three days after she took office. However, there is no evidence that the government paid for this photo and lacks proof that the photo isn’t copyrighted and a work of the US government. It’s also on his website if you scroll to the bottom of the link. Corky 06:41, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per EXIF. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:55, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 219.78.190.174 as no permission (No permission since). Converting to DR as uploader is a trusted user and was not properly notified of this tagging. @Xenotron: Where did you find the PDM license? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:05, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. At the archived page you can see Information about the photo > License: Mark. The TrainPix website used short license descriptions, such as Copyright, Zero, BY, BY-SA, BY-NC, BY-NC-SA, BY-ND, BY-NC-ND, BY-NC-SA and Mark, which defines Creative Commons Licenses. This website no longer exists as of March 2022 (it was removed by the main Ukrainian admin in protest against the war in Ukraine), but a similar site RailGallery.ru has been created by another admins of TrainPix instead of it, and it uses the same license description system (examples: Public domain, Mark, BY, BY-SA. A more detailed description of the licenses is available only for registered users in the photo upload form, and there you can see all available licenses on this screenshot: Copyright (C) (the default non-free license), Attribution (BY) and other CC licenses, Passing into the public domain (Zero) and There is no copyright (Mark). To the right of the license choice form you can also see a hyperlink (Please read before license selection) that leads to the Creative Commons license website. The Mark license description on this site is the Public Domain Mark 1.0, which is simillar to There is no copyright. Xenotron (talk) 08:04, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:56, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by StomboyCarGeek as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Useless redirect. Not uploader's request, so the redirect does not qualify for speedy deletion and I create a regular request. Taivo (talk) 10:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- you have deleted the official photo published by the Presidency of the Italian Republic.--Civa61 (talk) 14:17, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- No, File:Oscar Luigi Scalfaro portrait.jpg StomboyCarGeek (talk) 09:45, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- The redirect 8SCALFARO01gr.jpg to Oscar Luigi Scalfaro portrait.jpg is pretty useless because the name 8SCALFARO01gr it's ambiguous. StomboyCarGeek (talk) 09:47, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Don't delete it. The file (redirect) is in use nearly 50 times [3]. And put in the redirect in top of the Article for the sites they are use the redirect. --2003:DE:705:B36F:7CBE:D043:6204:A2A5 15:33, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep as a redirect. The redirects are there in case the file (under the old name) is used on any Wikimedia project or by other sites that might use the feature in Mediawiki that allows using images from Commons without requiring a local copy. ···日本穣 Talk to Nihonjoe 16:37, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:57, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
This image comes from PicsArt and is watermarked. So it's unlikely to be the uploaders own work and should be deleted as copyvio unless the original photographer can provide COM:VRT permission. Same goes for File:Hoo en televisión presentando su canción Cristales.jpg. Adamant1 (talk) 11:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The author is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Although it's probably also OOS anyway since they are questionably notable and the image isn't being used anywhere either. Adamant1 (talk) 11:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Crop of photo at https://www.thenicheng.com/apc-putting-everyone-at-risk-by-endangering-itself/ Adeletron 3030 (talk) 11:41, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Modern album cover for a record by Vertigo Records. So unlikely to be hostable on Commons. Adamant1 (talk) 12:00, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Extremely doubtful this is the uploaders own work. Otherwise, they should provide COM:VRT permission for Commons to host the image. Adamant1 (talk) 12:04, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The image is from Facebook and there's zero evidence that it's released under a free license. So it should be deleted as copyvio unless we can obtain COM:VRT permission from the original photographer. Adamant1 (talk) 12:19, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The image is from Facebook and there's zero evidence that it's released under a free license. So it should be deleted as copyvio unless we can obtain COM:VRT permission from the original photographer. Adamant1 (talk) 12:20, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Same goes for File:Freddie Poindexter1.jpg. Adamant1 (talk) 12:24, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Image is from Facebook and was taken as part of a photoshoot for a magazine article. So it should be deleted as COPYVIO unless the original photographer can provide Commons with COM:VRT permission. Same goes for File:Freysh Prince Tonight Magazine photo.jpg. Adamant1 (talk) 12:27, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
copyvio (2020 short film poster) Culex (talk) 12:28, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
copyvio (2020 short film poster) Culex (talk) 12:28, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:31, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:31, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:32, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
I want to remove my existence from the search engine index. Ianr151 (talk) 12:34, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:34, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
I want to remove my existence from the search engine index. Ianr151 (talk) 12:34, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:04, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Image is from Facebook. So it's likely copyvio unless we can obtain COM:VRT permission from the original photographer. Adamant1 (talk) 12:37, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Image is from Facebook. So likely copyvio unless we can obtain COM:VRT permission from the original photographer. Adamant1 (talk) 12:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:42, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
mage is from Facebook. So likely copyvio unless we can obtain COM:VRT permission from the original photographer. Adamant1 (talk) 12:46, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The uploader is the subject depicted in the image and it appears to come from Google. So we need COM:VRT permission from the original photographer to host the file. Adamant1 (talk) 12:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Image appears to be grainy and blurry, as if from a print image. An image search shows a non-cropped version of this image with full body as a youtube video image - [4]. This is highly unlikely to be "own work" Ravensfire (talk) 13:48, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete crop of an image that is widely published online, including pages dated before the upload to commons.[5][6] Verbcatcher (talk) 05:15, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:57, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by IROCKERitaly1 (talk · contribs)
[edit]These files are just advertising. All file descriptions and captions are highly promotional as are most of the file names. There are multiple obvious socks involved and all the uploaders' usernames match the company being advertised: Irocker. All files are unused.
IROCKERitaly1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
- File:Best SUP.jpg
- File:Top Rated SUP.jpg
- File:Top Stand Up Paddle Boards.jpg
- File:Top Rated SUP 2.jpg
- File:IROCKER Sport iSUP.jpg
- File:Top Stand Up Paddle Boards 2021.jpg
1iROCKERCanada (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
- File:Top Stand Up Paddle Board.jpg
- File:Best Stand Up Paddle Boards.jpg
- File:Best Stand Up Paddle Board2021.jpg
IROCKAR (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
- File:Irocker paddle boards.gif
- File:Top Stand Up Paddle Board 2021.jpg
- File:Top Rated SUP 2021.jpg
- File:Best SUP 2021.jpg
- File:Best All Round SUP.jpg
- File:Best Stand Up Paddle Board.jpg
- File:IROCKER Paddle Boarding.jpg
- File:11- White- AMAZON.jpg
- File:IROCKER.jpg
- File:IROCKER-WEB1.jpg
IROCKWRUK (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
- File:Top Inflatable SUPs.jpg
- File:Best Fishing SUP Brand 2021.jpg
- File:Best Stand Up Paddle Board 2021.jpg
- File:Top Inflatable SUPs 2021.jpg
- File:Inflatable paddle boards.jpg
- File:Paddling.jpg
IROCKERCanada (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
- File:Paddle boarding.jpg
- File:Top Stand Up Paddle Boarding.jpg
- File:Paddle Boards.jpg
- File:Inflatable paddle boards 2021.jpg
- File:Paddle Boarding 2021.jpg
- File:Stand Up Paddle Board.jpg
IrockerSpain (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
Marbletan (talk) 17:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:02, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Appears to be a screenshot/crop of a video. A different crop of what appears to be the same screenshot appears at https://mobile.newsis.com/view.html?ar_id=NISX20140930_0013202099. Uploader claims it is a photograph, but that seems unlikely given the size and quality. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 19:14, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Not quite the same screenshot as his mouth is open in the Commons upload, but yes, plainly from the same angle and the same broadcast footage, and this contradicts the uploader's talk page claim of having taken the photograph personally on a family trip. --Lord Belbury (talk) 20:50, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- That's nonsense. I had kept this picture for years along with many others.. All of the assumptions made here are not adequate. Also the link has the different picture. This was not a family trip just another day attending a press briefing with my sister.. I'm not sure why I'm arguing about this.. Alexkoh89 (talk) 22:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- I can upload other pictures if needed.. Alexkoh89 (talk) 22:45, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- No one’s assuming anything here. We’re just pointing out things that strike out as odd and are often red flags for copyrighted imagery. In fact, we’re asking for more *verifiable* information because right now, all we have is a very small image with metadata generated in the last 24 hours that indicates it’s a screenshot. Do you have the original file with the camera EXIF data, at full resolution and uncropped? Adeletron 3030 (talk) 03:20, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: already. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The Arrowhead logo on the helmet is copyrighted, therefore this can’t be licensed under the Creative Commons license. Corky 19:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Clearly below COM:TOO US, Keep.Jonteemil (talk) 20:04, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - per Commons:De minimis: the Chiefs logo is not the main subject of the image, apart of being renderised in low resolution. (see previous similar DR here and here) - Fma12 (talk) 20:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The Raider logo on the helmet is copyrighted, therefore this file cannot be placed under a Creative Commons license. Corky 19:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - per Commons:De minimis: the Raiders logo is not the main subject of the image, apart of being renderised in low resolution. (see previous similar DR here and here) - Fma12 (talk) 20:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Current Patriots logo on the helmet is copyrighted therefore this file can’t be licensed under a Creative Commons license. Corky 19:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Per past precedent that the logo usage is covered under Commons:De minimis. ValarianB (talk) 12:41, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Keep as the original creator of the images, per @ValarianB: plus per similar DR here and here) Fma12 (talk) 14:06, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Current Patriots logo on the helmet is copyrighted therefore this file can’t be licensed under a Creative Commons license. Corky 19:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - per Commons:De minimis: the Patriots logo is not the main subject of the image so it was renderised in low resolution. (see previous similar DR here and here) - Fma12 (talk) 20:14, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep as per Fma12 - The uniform is the main subject and imho the logo is DEMINIMIS. The logo isn't full blast across the chest or trouser leg. –Davey2010Talk 20:22, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Current Patriots logo on the helmet is copyrighted therefore this file can’t be licensed under a Creative Commons license. Corky 19:42, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Per past precedent that the logo usage is covered under Commons:De minimis. ValarianB (talk) 12:38, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Current Patriots logo on the helmet is copyrighted therefore this file can’t be licensed under a Creative Commons license. Corky 19:43, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Per past precedent that the logo usage is covered under Commons:De minimis. ValarianB (talk) 12:39, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
The Flickr file was uploaded as free use, but that can't be possible because Pokémon isn't owned by the uploader. SL93 (talk) 20:23, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete COM:FOP SK only allows non-commerical use. --A1Cafel (talk) 03:33, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Also, Pokemon characters are copyrighted. See COM:DW. Ox1997cow (talk) 16:08, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:04, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kaziasifmahmud26 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal files of a user indefinitely blocked for spamming. Photos are outside COM:SCOPE.
- File:Kazi-asif-mahmud.jpg
- File:Kaziasifmahmud-monmila.jpg
- File:Kazi Asif Mahmud.jpg
- File:Kazi asif mahmud.jpg
Marbletan (talk) 16:48, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 05:06, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope Trade (talk) 01:07, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. This is just collateral from English Wikipedia spam. MarioGom (talk) 20:08, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:47, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by PedidosYa1 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Not taken by the subject, so false claims of own work. Only used in non-English promotional draft on enwiki.
- File:Santiago Quiros Jovenes Protagonistas.jpg
- File:Santiago Quiros frente a camara.jpg
- File:Santiago Quiros Legislatura Joven.jpg
- File:Santiago Quiros Academic all-America Team.jpg
- File:Santiago Quiros Modelo.jpg
- File:Santiago Quiros VosDecidis.jpg
- File:Santiago Quiros Serve.jpg
- File:All-Conference Santiago Quiros.jpg
- File:Umobile vs Loyola, Santiago Quiros.jpg
- File:Santiago Quiros Casucci.jpg
Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:23, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:47, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Professional photo with no exif, unlikely to be own work. Gbawden (talk) 10:33, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:45, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
VRT-permission from author Manuel Ramos Casaus is needed. Taivo (talk) 10:41, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:45, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
suspicion photo Zafer (talk) 11:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:45, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Metadata credits MJNETO as the copyright owner, the uploader appears to be the subject. Not currently used on any Wiki project. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 11:37, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:45, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I want to remove my presence from all search engine indexes Ianr151 (talk) 12:29, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Didym (talk) 16:44, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I want to remove my existence from the search engine index. Ianr151 (talk) 12:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Didym (talk) 16:44, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I want to remove my existence from the search engine index. Ianr151 (talk) 12:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Didym (talk) 16:44, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
From a likely Flickrwashing account. While the account is deactivated so we can't verify for sure, the low resolution, the Getty Images-style quality/editing, the clearly incorrect 2010 date and the Flickr user apparently taking credit for this Getty Images photo tells me the Flickr user was posting 3rd party photos, not their own. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 15:34, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:43, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Poor quality image - we have much better images at the respective vehicle category –Davey2010Talk 15:37, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:42, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Likely copyright violation: [7], also no permission seen and I don't see evidence that Adama Traore is the author of this photo. Iggy the Swan (talk) 17:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:41, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
- File:Erbil City from sky.jpg
- File:Iraqi Street View.jpg
- File:Baghdad City View.jpg
- File:Iraqi Clock in Baghdad.jpg
- File:The statue of freedom of religion in Baghdad.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 19:23, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:40, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Paramount Pictures logos
[edit]A different variant of the Paramount logo has been previously kept at DR. I've seen these logos get frequently nominated for speedy deletion, so I'm opening a DR to resolve the situation one way or another. Basically, there are some versions of the logo which are pre-1927 and thus PD, and we need to figure out whether the modifications in the new logo exceed COM:TOO US (or if there are any other reasons for it to be PD like no notice).
- File:Paramount Pics logo.png
- File:Paramount Pictures 2022 (Blue).svg
- File:Paramount Pictures Corporation logo.png
- File:Paramount Pictures Corporation logo.svg
- File:Paramount Pictures logo.svg
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:55, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The RE/MAX case may be a helpful comparison. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:56, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Apparently these logos are derivative of the original Paramount Pictures logo used since 1915 as per argument from P199. Since the 2022 logo (with "Pictures" tag) are appeared in English Wikipedia but ineligible for copyright, the original file at English Wikipedia should be transferred to Wikimedia Commons and tagged the logo as {{TOO-US}} when necessary to affirm this. IMO, per previous discussion, this logo (along with all previous variants) are ineligible for copyright. Yayan550 (talk) 04:02, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep These logos are created in 1967. Giving these logos are created between 1927 and 1977, these logos are in public domain, incoclusive, although does not influenced the trademark registration. Paramount current 2022 logo also considered as such because it just a derivative of the logo created in 1967. 114.125.250.28 21:05, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Per discussion. I agree that the REMAX case is relevant. I also could not find a copyright registration for this logo. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 03:06, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
One of the public art sculpture near the Seine river, I do not know the author, but it's dont look older than 70 years anyway. Miniwark (talk) 14:09, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; no FOP in France. --Gbawden (talk) 08:46, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
It's marked as US Government work on Flickr, but the credit line reads "Boureima Hama/AFP" Adeletron 3030 (talk) 14:17, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:46, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
YouTube is copyrighted Alejitao123 (talk) 15:20, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:47, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
File:Fotothek df hauptkatalog 0402838 Dresden-Neustadt. Wohn- und Geschäftshaus, Große Meißner Straße 3. Straßenfront (Blick aus der Wohnung des Fotografen, 2. Etage).jpg
[edit]Doppelte Bild-Nummer, daher irrtümlicher Upload. Foto gehört zur nächsten Beschreibung. Derbrauni (talk) 18:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 18:12, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Starlux Airlines
[edit]Complex logo exceeding COM:TOO Taiwan. It is the logo of Starlux Airlines, a private company based in Taiwan. The fact that the logo appears on a government document does not cancel its copyright.
Wcam (talk) 16:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:52, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Some time travel map. I am not sure, but is it really in the project scope? Ignatus (talk) 17:24, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:53, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Redirect from a former graphic with misspelled file-name. Redirect NOT necessary, should be deleted. Smartcom5 (Any thoughts?) 22:20, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: we usually keep redirects, especially if that file name was used for several years like in this case. --Rosenzweig τ 15:05, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ahonc as no permission (No permission since)
This was transferred from another wiki, so converting to DR to allow for further research. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:13, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Author is Сергій Лепеха and uploaded by Kolisnyk Yurij. So we need permission from Сергій Лепеха.--Anatoliy (talk) 19:27, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:42, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
No evidence of PD. Xunks (talk) 15:34, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:43, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
File:Latvijas okupācijas muzejs, Strēlnieku laukums 1, Rīga, Latvia - M.Strīķis - Panoramio.jpg
[edit]No freedom of panorama in Latvia, see COMMONS:FOP 159.148.28.2 16:24, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:45, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
unlikely to be own work
Didym (talk) 20:23, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:46, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
Photo taken by Iran Ministry of Defense and not Fars News. Not freely licensed. Streamline8988 (talk) 20:42, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:47, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Johnj1995 as Logo (above threshold of originality)
Converting to DR per COM:CSD#F3. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:00, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Johnj1995 as Logo (above threshold of originality)
Converting to DR per COM:CSD#F3. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:59, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Minorax as no permission (No permission since). Claimed to be PD-textlogo from 2013, converting to DR. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: very likely over COM:TOO, images of clouds in background. --IronGargoyle (talk) 19:19, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Same valid reasons for the first one I marked for deletion (i.e. no indication that the uploader is the original author). Magnatyrannus (talk) 15:14, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 19:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Thumbnail Logo Salah 182.3.100.238 07:04, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: in use, update it if the logo is wrong. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 00:50, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
duplicate of File:Capture d’écran.png with additional grey stuff Enyavar (talk) 08:26, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 00:49, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
No evidence of notability Dronebogus (talk) 00:48, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - this should probably be considered alongside the very similar File:Combined Borders of Spain and Moldova.jpg, File:Combined Borders of Macedonia and Germany.jpg, File:Combined Borders of France and Sweden.jpg, File:Combined Borders of Ukraine and Finland.jpg, File:Combined Borders of Serbia and Lithuania.jpg, File:Switzerland and Belarus Combined Borders.jpg, File:Border Combination of Albania and Bulgaria.jpg, all uploaded by @GTWhiz: over a few days in August 2021 -- uploading these images is that user's only global edits. None are used on another project. I can't quite think of a realistic educational purpose, but I did ask at the user's talk page just in case they could fill us in... Ajpolino (talk) 02:56, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 20:06, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
File has zero uses across wikis and is superceded with superior PNG and SVG versions VileGecko (talk) 10:49, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 21:17, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
The permission parameter that the uploader included described the image as free to use without alteration for non-commercial use. NC licenses are not Commons-compatible (see COM:LICENSING). Nacaru (talk) 14:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 11:00, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
© Ava Hidalgo, Kapuly Dietrich, Insel Gruppe AG M2k~dewiki (talk) 15:11, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Even if the uploader probably is a company person, CC licensing does not seem likely. 217.239.14.233 17:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- What exactly needs to be done so that the image has the correct licensing and can be published? Inselgruppe (talk) 12:54, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Is there any news conerning this? 161.62.252.34 12:07, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Inselgruppe: Please have the author or copyright owner send a permission by e-mail. For details see COM:VRT/de. --Rosenzweig τ 15:01, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 11:00, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
The photograph is a derivative work of a potentially copyrighted painting located in Forssa, Finland. I do not know who the painter is, but as the painting is located in a building built in 1930 (Forssan työväentalo, Wikidata:Q112082608), it is possible that it is less than 70 year since the painter's death and thus the painting would still be under copyright. Freedom of panorama is for buildings only in Finland. Apalsola t • c 18:18, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- I didn't know that. If this is the case, it is okay to delete the photo. Vihruli (talk) 06:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 11:00, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
While I'm sure the original court case was in the public domain, the tattoo itself is likely copyrighted by the creator. Should be moved to the English Wikipedia after deletion as it qualifies for fair use and is used there. Chess (User talk:Chess) Please ping when replying. 00:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Emphatic Keep. While the original design or plan of the tattoo itself may be copyrighted, this photograph of the execution of that tattoo (pun intended) entered the public domain when it was placed in the public record by Glickman and Glickman in Taylor v. Cnty. of L.A.. Similarly, while you may be able to copyright your own image and likeness, you cannot prevent someone from taking a photo of you on the street and selling it to a newspaper. The subject has no rights to the photo. It's a distinct immovable medium and thus could have been independently copyrighted had it not entered the public domain. Indeed, celebrities often copyright their own image, but they do not own universal copyright to images of their face (e.g. Paparazzi) [8] [9] [10]. They only own things such as reproductions of their likeness, etc. It's not just a fair use, it's a distinct copyright situation. Further e.g. Sandoval v New Line Cinema (973 F. Supp. 409 (S.D.N.Y. 1997)) This is still an evolving area of copyright, but some precedents do exist.Shibbolethink (talk) 02:11, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 16:07, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Johnj1995 as Logo (above threshold of originality)
Converting to DR per COM:CSD#F3. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:55, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 16:08, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Johnj1995 as Logo (above threshold of originality). Converting to DR per COM:CSD#F3. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- to zdjęcie zrobiłem podczas meczu w Warcie przykro nam fanom że się nie podoba asiu (talk) 08:00, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 16:09, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Blåhaj
[edit]Some discussion has taken place on enwiki indicating these are derivative works of a non-free model and therefore copyrighted. I don't have sufficient knowledge of copyright law in that area, especially given that laws in Sweden, the Netherlands, and the US are likely different, but if that is true then these images should be deleted.
- File:00662244kevin.jpg
- File:Blåhaj! (51836802716).jpg
- File:Blåhaj.jpg
- File:FF36 DSC6174.jpg
- File:IKEA Blåhaj plush shark toys - regular and small variants - bottom view.jpg
- File:IKEA Blåhaj plush shark toys - regular and small variants - side view.jpg
- File:IKEA Catch 0127 (5203047797).jpg
- File:IKEA East Palo Alto - July 2021 - 28.jpg
- File:IKEA Taoyuan 20200813.jpg
- File:Mattress Expansion (30923678767).jpg
- File:O NO Shark 8142 (4614039911).jpg
- File:Sharks at IKEA SH (4370022811).jpg
Elli (talk) 01:06, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- this probably falls under Commons:TOYS. Evrik (talk) 01:17, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- The initial point of discussion, for context. File:FF36 DSC6174.jpg might be OK, given that the shark is more of prop... hard to tell. File:IKEA Catch 0127 (5203047797).jpg might be OK, but it definitely seems like the plushies are the reason why the photograph was taken. File:IKEA East Palo Alto - July 2021 - 28.jpg and File:IKEA Taoyuan 20200813.jpg I have similar thoughts on. File:Mattress Expansion (30923678767).jpg... maybe, if we assume the shark was just there. The rest I think are pretty clear derivative works of Blåhaj and must go, unless it can be proven that the design is really old or something. Batsignalling Clindberg. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 01:26, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- COM:TOO Sweden states: A simple general rule is that if it is unlikely that two persons would create, for example, a text identically or similarly, the text is probably sufficiently original to qualify as a protected work. (..) Often, the requirements for copyright protection are considered to be relatively low. This might disqualify Blåhaj… Maddy from Celeste (talk) 07:43, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Conceding with the assessment of User:Brainulator9. If some or all of the files named by them as possibly okay can be retained (particularly the Taiwan one, as it has encyclopedic value proving the notability of Blahaj as a popular product used by IKEA in marketing, and is of the interior of a building rather than focusing the toy so it should be okay... I hope?) then that would be quite good, but I don't know enough to say if copyright law permits it. I support the deletion of the other files. I was not aware they would potentially be copyvios (and now I have learned something!).
- If not already done, editors at the Korean, Russian, and Norwegian Wikipedias should be notified as well so that they are aware of the discussion and may take appropriate action in accordance with their own project policies and the copyright law of their respective regions, as all their versions of the toy's page feature some of these files. Joyce-stick (talk) 10:04, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Additional note: Two of the images, specifically File:IKEA East Palo Alto - July 2021 - 28.jpg and File:IKEA Taoyuan 20200813.jpg are also used in a gallery on the Japanese Wikipedia's version of the "IKEA" article. They should be fine, given that they're both primarily focusing the interiors of the stores and not the toy, but it bears mentioning anyway that the JA wiki editors may need a notification as well. Joyce-stick (talk) 19:12, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- So, another editor uploaded yet another Blåhaj image at File:Blåhaj IKEA Kungens Kurva, June 18 2022.jpg. I believe this one could probably be fine since it's yet another one that's more a picture of an IKEA store and less a picture of the toy shark, but I'd honestly not be opposed to just deleting this regardless since it doesn't exactly convey anything not already in the other pictures (I guess it is a marginally higher quality photo than the Palo Alto one?) and we don't really need more of these pictures to be worrying about. I'm not sure if it'd be appropriate to add yet another image to this deletion discussion or if we need to start yet another deletion request/discussion to get that one deleted, if it needs to be, so I'll leave that up to more experienced Commons users. Joyce-stick (talk) 20:45, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Seems like the photograph is focusing on the sharks to me. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 23:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- I guess so. It's definitely the intent, at the least. Well, I don't feel strongly about it one way or another. If it must be deleted, then it should be. Joyce-stick (talk) 05:52, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Seems like the photograph is focusing on the sharks to me. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 23:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and COM:TOYS. The toy is imho too prominent on the photos of the shop interior to be evaluated as de minimis. Cropping would be useless. Therefore all images have to be deleted. --Ellywa (talk) 21:57, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Blåhaj
[edit]Per the prior deletion discussion above, these appear to be derivative works of a copyrightable toy, and are therefore not suitable to be hosted on Commons under the terms of COM:L.
— Red-tailed hawk (nest) 01:35, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
- Info: File:Blahaj trans flag.jpg seems to have been automatically and erroneously transferred from dewiki. If deleted, should probably be put back there. Madeline (part of me) 21:46, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 12:49, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Blåhaj
[edit]Blahaj is a copyrighted toy. Unfortunately, this means that we can't include derivative works that incorporate the three-dimensional work in a greater-than-de minimis fashion. This one does; it's clearly a posed picture that choses a Blahaj to be its central focus, so it needs to be deleted in light of COM:CARES and COM:PRP.
— Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:04, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- Agree per nom --Brainy J (talk) 23:20, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:01, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
Probable copyright violation, no free license at the declared source. COM:FOP Nagorno-Karabakh does not indicate any special copyright rules for the office of the president. Verbcatcher (talk) 02:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ոսկե արծիվ - Gold eagle order (NKR).jpg. Verbcatcher (talk) 03:09, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- See also Commons:Deletion requests/Awards of Nagorno-Karabakh. --Interfase (talk) 20:32, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as per COM:FOP Nagorno-Karabakh. Aslo "PD-AM-EXEMPT" is wrong license for photos of the 3D-photos of awards of unrecognised Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. Nagorno-Karabakh Republic is not a part of Armenia and even is not recognised by Armenia. --Interfase (talk) 20:34, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello. Orders/awards/medals are excluded from copyright in this de-facto republic. See https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-AR-exempt : {{PD-AR-exempt}} Thus, your claims have no ground. --Headgo (talk) 10:39, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
- It is not 2D-image of the award. It is 3D-photo of this award and is copyright protected beacuse there is no any special copyright rules for the office of the president as NKR. --Interfase (talk) 14:57, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
- And if I tell you that photos have just two dimensions, will you continue searching for excuse to delete the images? As I said here is the law: http://arlexis.am/DocumentView.aspx?docid=631 Article 6 of it states among others that "state symbols and signs (flags, coats of arms, medals, coins, etc.)" not subject of copyright. so you can try to find a 4-th and 5-th dimension, but it remains so, these can be freely distributed and used. Cheers. --Headgo (talk) 17:15, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
- The photo is a subject of copyright. --Interfase (talk) 18:22, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
- And if I tell you that photos have just two dimensions, will you continue searching for excuse to delete the images? As I said here is the law: http://arlexis.am/DocumentView.aspx?docid=631 Article 6 of it states among others that "state symbols and signs (flags, coats of arms, medals, coins, etc.)" not subject of copyright. so you can try to find a 4-th and 5-th dimension, but it remains so, these can be freely distributed and used. Cheers. --Headgo (talk) 17:15, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. This is a photo of a 3D object, that has been discussed may times on commons in relation to photos of coins. The medal is in PD, but the photo of it is copyrighted, as it is taken from http://www.president.nkr.am/ru/nkr/stateAwards/#award5 . So the image must be deleted. --Ellywa (talk) 22:00, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Probable violation of the photographer's copyright, no free license at the declared source. The PD-AM-exempt tag may apply to the medal (although I am unsure whether Armenian tags should be applied to works of the Republic of Artsakh), but photographs of 3D objects such as coins and medals need have a free license for the photograph as well as the medal. Verbcatcher (talk) 03:08, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Медаль Анания Ширакаци.jpg. Verbcatcher (talk) 03:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- See also Commons:Deletion requests/Awards of Nagorno-Karabakh. --Interfase (talk) 20:32, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as per COM:FOP Nagorno-Karabakh. Aslo "PD-AM-EXEMPT" is wrong license for photos of the 3D-photos of awards of unrecognised Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. Nagorno-Karabakh Republic is not a part of Armenia and even is not recognised by Armenia. --Interfase (talk) 20:35, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Hello. Orders/awards/medals are excluded from copyright in this de-facto republic. See https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-AR-exempt :
{{PD-AR-exempt}}
Thus, your claims have no ground. --Headgo (talk) 10:38, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
- It is not 2D-image of the award. It is edited 3D-photo of this award and is copyright protected beacuse there is no any special copyright rules for the office of the president as NKR, from which web-site the photo was taken. --Interfase (talk) 15:01, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
- Photos have just two dimensions. As I said here is the law: http://arlexis.am/DocumentView.aspx?docid=631 Article 6 of it states among others that "state symbols and signs (flags, coats of arms, medals, coins, etc.)" not subject of copyright. So please don't search for new dimensions, these images can be freely distributed and used. --Headgo (talk) 17:44, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
- The photo is a subject of copyright. --Interfase (talk) 18:23, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
- Photos have just two dimensions. As I said here is the law: http://arlexis.am/DocumentView.aspx?docid=631 Article 6 of it states among others that "state symbols and signs (flags, coats of arms, medals, coins, etc.)" not subject of copyright. So please don't search for new dimensions, these images can be freely distributed and used. --Headgo (talk) 17:44, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. This is a photo of a 3D object, that has been discussed may times on commons in relation to photos of coins. The medal is in PD, but the photo of it is copyrighted, as it is taken from http://www.president.nkr.am/ru/nkr/stateAwards/#award5 . So the image must be deleted. --Ellywa (talk) 22:01, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
according to description practically a duplicate of File:USA_Hawaii_relief_location_map.svg; now unused Enyavar (talk) 08:32, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete unused image, could be easily replaced by a template. --Matr1x-101Pinging me doesn't hurt! {user - talk? - useless contributions} 00:20, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, it is not an exact copy of the other map, includes the location of a town. Useful outside Wikipedia perhaps, or in use already. --Ellywa (talk) 22:03, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by FMSky as duplicate (dup) and the most recent rationale was: Wendy yoshimura in 1976.jpg
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as the nominated file carries an OTRS-permission-tag, while the other image-version, which has the same situation (uploaded not by photographer) does not. Its deletion may result in future problems. -- Túrelio (talk) 08:43, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Can you explain in basic English what the "same situation (uploaded not by photographer) does not" mean? Please show me the "other image-version."
- Thank you, Nancy Wong (Edmunddantes) Edmunddantes (talk) 18:24, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- The "other image-version" is the target-file, i.e. the file to which the duplicate-nominated file (File:WENDYYOSHIMURA1976SFphotoNancyWong.jpg) will be redirected after its deletion, File:Wendy yoshimura in 1976.jpg. However, after you have disclosed the connection between uploader and photographer, this discussion is idle and the requested duplicate-deletion can be performed, if no one objects. --Túrelio (talk) 20:05, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Torelio, Please go ahead and delete the duplicate that FMSky created from my original file of the 1976 photo of Wendy Yoshimura that that I took in Piedmont, California. Someone else also cropped another one of my photos (of Rev. Jim Jones) that I don't approve. A full frame negative usually gives more information and should be respected.
- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rev._Jim_Jones,_1977_(cropped)2.jpg
- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wendy_yoshimura_in_1976_(cropped).jpg Edmunddantes (talk) 23:20, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- there's no reason to delete these two files at all, and when you uploaded them you allowed people to edit/crop them. but yes i agree that the one with the OTRS-permission-tag should be kept and the other duplicate deleted --FMSky (talk) 01:58, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. I decided to history merge both images, because Wendy yoshimura in 1976 contained exif data mentioning the photographer. So that file is now a redirect. --Ellywa (talk) 22:18, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
bad GIF; superseded by File:Bundesarchiv Bild 183-36969-0025, DDR-Jugendauswahl für FIFA-Jugendturnier (Waldemar Mühlbächer).jpg Sebastian Wallroth (talk) 08:46, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and COM:REDUNDANT. File is not in use on the projects. --Ellywa (talk) 22:20, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
On the source website is not stated that this file is under CC0. Probably the same video is also available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Krrr2bcJEw. Albert Horáček (talk) 09:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellywa (talk) 22:21, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sr. Rinoseronte (talk · contribs)
[edit]Incorrect PD claims: published (or registered with the U.S. Copyright Office) before January 1, 1927 fails because they are all dated after 1927, countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 70 years or fewer because the authors are either not known and/or would have had to have dropped dead within a year of taking the picture.
- File:Haj Mohammad Hossein Kazeroni.jpg
- File:Fazlolah-e Dahesh.jpg
- File:حاج جواد برق لامع.jpg
- File:کارخانه حوله بافی برق لامع.jpg
- File:کارخانه پشمباف اصفهان.jpg
Lord Belbury (talk) 11:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Too old to be CCBY as claimed on one of the sources. --Ellywa (talk) 22:24, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sr. Rinoseronte (talk · contribs)
[edit]public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 70 years or fewer claimed on two images where the photographer is stated as "unknown". We do not know when they died or where these images actually came from (the source cited is a blog that doesn't specify their origin).
Belbury (talk) 09:36, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- Keep PD-Sweden is the correct license for an anonymous image from Sweden. --RAN (talk) 13:13, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- That's for when the photographer is "not known, and cannot be traced". Are we happy that the uploader has attempted to determine the photographer before concluding "unknown"?
- File:Nils de Maré 1910s.jpg appears to be a second-hand copy of https://riksarkivet.se/Media/pdf-filer/vala/vala_1914.pdf, the blogger having taken a photo of their own computer screen. The credit given in the PDF is simply Foto: Riksarkivet, although I'm not sure how to navigate the riksarkivet.se website to find the original. Belbury (talk) 13:52, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- That is for "artistic" images. All images taken prior to the law change on 1 January 1973 that are not "artistic" were never eligible for copyright. For an example of an artistic image. See File:Salvador Dali A (Dali Atomicus) 09633u.jpg where the photographer uses a a set, costumes, and/or elaborate poses. Just pressing the shutter, is something a monkey can do. See: File:Macaca nigra self-portrait large.jpg. --RAN (talk) 18:32, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- I see, thank you, I misread the "one of the following applies" as requiring both. Then
I withdraw my nomination Belbury (talk) 18:47, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- I see, thank you, I misread the "one of the following applies" as requiring both. Then
Kept: nomination withdrawn, PD-Sweden. --IronGargoyle (talk) 05:27, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Docosong as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: according to the source, the image is not in copyright: https://www.todocoleccion.net/facturas-antiguas/factura-tarrago-bohigas-jarabes-refrescantes-espc-azucar-piedra-riera-alta-27-barna-1890~x95950291
From 1890, company was dissolved in 1904. Achim55 (talk) 21:32, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellywa (talk) 22:25, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
wrong source, the autor is not the copyright holder Docosong (talk) 21:50, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Author in copyright w:ca:Adolf Florensa i Ferrer (1889-1968).--Docosong (talk) 12:45, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- The PDF version of the book has been released with a CC-BY 4.0 license. Paddy Mc Aloon (talk) 17:39, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Author in copyright w:ca:Adolf Florensa i Ferrer (1889-1968).--Docosong (talk) 12:45, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Source is correct (p. 23); Barcelona can license its own work. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:21, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, per {{PD-Spain-photo}}, older then 25 years. --Ellywa (talk) 22:28, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
wrong source, the author is not the copyright holder https://bcnroc.ajuntament.barcelona.cat/jspui/handle/11703/101775 Docosong (talk) 21:50, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Author in copyright w:ca:Adolf Florensa i Ferrer (1889-1968).--Docosong (talk) 12:43, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- PDF version of The book has been released with a CC-BY 4.0 license. Paddy Mc Aloon (talk) 17:38, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Source is correct (p. 290); Barcelona can license its own work. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:08, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, per {{PD-Spain-photo}}, older then 25 years. --Ellywa (talk) 22:29, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
a post-1976 photo, inelegible under the PD-Italy/PD-1996 licence — danyele 22:27, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Copyright for photos in Italy is 20 years only. The PD-template is correct. --Ellywa (talk) 07:31, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Potential Copyright Violation. City Website has "All Rights Reserved" under it, can't find anything saying it is free, and this doesn't fall under Threshold of Originality. WeaponizingArchitecture (talk) 23:43, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Well if this is applied to Parkersburg, What about Pearl, Mississippi. They have an "All rights reserved" on their website. Or Zumbrota, Minnesota, who also has an all rights reversed on their website. why haven't they been nominated for deletion yet? I just don't understand how Parkersburg gets targeted, yet those too are basically given a bail out. why, just why? Can I at least just put a "fair use" on the flag? TheVexillologistofKingwood (talk) 17:39, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Look, not all flags are “fair use”. You must ask the city to explicitly release rights, and provide a means of confirming such, under a license compatible with Commons. See Commons:Email templates for more information. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 20:18, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- All right, now I understand. I apologize for my erratic behavior, it was childish. I have asked the city on their Facebook account about the rights regarding the flag. If they still use it anymore, I cant find any images of the flag anywhere in Parkersburg. According to FOTW, they found it from an eBay sale from a local historical society, so it might not even be official. For now, I will have to wait. TheVexillologistofKingwood (talk) 00:34, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The flag of Zumbrota can be counted as PD for its simplistic shapes. It does not go above the threshold of originality. Flagvisioner (talk) 21:49, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Look, not all flags are “fair use”. You must ask the city to explicitly release rights, and provide a means of confirming such, under a license compatible with Commons. See Commons:Email templates for more information. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 20:18, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Would like to add that this flag might be in the public domain. The Tumbling Waters Museum existed from 1975 to 1978, and [11] says that it is likely that it is an item from there. Although we cannot assume, people do not often try to get copyright protection for a flag. Plus, the emblem was (or is not?) the seal of Parkersburg, which can be seen in [12]. So it is highly likely that the flag or/and emblem was never even available on the city's website. So I believe the flag should be kept. Flagvisioner (talk) 21:42, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- I did get a reply from Parkersburg, however they never said anything about the whether the flag has any copyright protections, and they said the flag was adopted in the 70's. They also sent me a picture of the flag itself, where the flag appears to be in a display frame, like the flag of Barbour County, WV. That is all they said, but at least I got some more information from the city themselves about the flag. I might update the flag to the image the city sent to me once this whole mess is settled. TheVexillologistofKingwood (talk) 18:54, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- Here's the picture they have sent to me: https://i.imgur.com/mAQWQml.jpg. I am very surprised they even sent me an image of the flag themselves. TheVexillologistofKingwood (talk) 18:57, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- I suggest you ask them when the flag was originally designed, and if there was ever any copyright placed on it. From there, we can determine if it is copyrighted or not. And, I would like to put further emphasis on the fact that cities rarely seek copyright protection for a flag, as it would heavily discourage use of it, which would mainly destroy the purpose of a flag. Flagvisioner (talk) 01:09, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think Parkersburg is going to respond anytime soon. Most of these cities only seem to respond once and that's it. the flag must have been made during or before 1975, according to the date of the Tumbling Waters Museum operations. Even then, I can barely find much online about the museum ether. I highly doubt that the city ever placed a copyright on the flag. Considering that the only evidence of this flag's existence was in some museum that no longer exists, as well as a single photo from the city themselves. It seems that the flag was rarely used by the city themselves, as it only seemed to appear in a display case. TheVexillologistofKingwood (talk) 01:12, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- I don't even get any responses about flags from cities, haha. How active are they on Facebook? Might make no difference, but messaging the city on there might be worth a shot. Flagvisioner (talk) (contribs)
03:20, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
- I don't even get any responses about flags from cities, haha. How active are they on Facebook? Might make no difference, but messaging the city on there might be worth a shot. Flagvisioner (talk) (contribs)
- I don't think Parkersburg is going to respond anytime soon. Most of these cities only seem to respond once and that's it. the flag must have been made during or before 1975, according to the date of the Tumbling Waters Museum operations. Even then, I can barely find much online about the museum ether. I highly doubt that the city ever placed a copyright on the flag. Considering that the only evidence of this flag's existence was in some museum that no longer exists, as well as a single photo from the city themselves. It seems that the flag was rarely used by the city themselves, as it only seemed to appear in a display case. TheVexillologistofKingwood (talk) 01:12, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- I suggest you ask them when the flag was originally designed, and if there was ever any copyright placed on it. From there, we can determine if it is copyrighted or not. And, I would like to put further emphasis on the fact that cities rarely seek copyright protection for a flag, as it would heavily discourage use of it, which would mainly destroy the purpose of a flag. Flagvisioner (talk) 01:09, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- Here's the picture they have sent to me: https://i.imgur.com/mAQWQml.jpg. I am very surprised they even sent me an image of the flag themselves. TheVexillologistofKingwood (talk) 18:57, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- I did get a reply from Parkersburg, however they never said anything about the whether the flag has any copyright protections, and they said the flag was adopted in the 70's. They also sent me a picture of the flag itself, where the flag appears to be in a display frame, like the flag of Barbour County, WV. That is all they said, but at least I got some more information from the city themselves about the flag. I might update the flag to the image the city sent to me once this whole mess is settled. TheVexillologistofKingwood (talk) 18:54, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
_(1).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_tour.jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped)_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_(1).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(1).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_(1).jpg){kind=link}
_(1).jpg){kind=link}
_Coinage_Emblem.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2022.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_TV_Channel_on_Telewebion.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_TV_Channel_on_Telewebion_2022.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){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&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?target=8SCALFARO01gr.jpg&title=Special%3AGlobalUsage&limit=500){kind=link}
![[4]](https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi.ytimg.com%2Fvi%2FkAF4Aj5ruwI%2Fmaxresdefault.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DkAF4Aj5ruwI&tbnid=RJc8OEFIAEA4pM&vet=12ahUKEwiDuJmZydr5AhUhnWoFHbq7A-sQMyg8egQIARA3..i&docid=LSPSgbEZPvhxQM&w=1280&h=720&q=filipe%20neri%20ferr%C3%A3o&hl=en&ved=2ahUKEwiDuJmZydr5AhUhnWoFHbq7A-sQMyg8egQIARA3){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_tour.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_tour.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_tour.jpg){kind=link}
_tour.jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped)_(cropped).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(cropped)_(cropped).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(cropped)_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped)_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
2.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_09633u.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[12]](https://www.crwflags.com/fotw/images/u/us-wv-pb).gif){kind=link}
- Keep. Given the above, the flag is old enough to need a copyright notice, and I don’t see one. Besides, being an official flag makes it {{PD-US-GovEdict}}. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 21:53, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per evidence of User:TheVexillologistofKingwood that this flag really exists, and per Tea.... about the licensing. --Ellywa (talk) 07:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
