Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2022/09/16
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
_(HY).svg){kind=link}
![31 File:"Nixon Gets 1st Last of Latin Difficulties" article.jpg](#File:"Nixon_Gets_1st_Last_of_Latin_Difficulties"_article.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![81 File:"First Snowfall" (26462562610).jpg](#File:"First_Snowfall"_(26462562610).jpg){kind=link}
_logo_transparent.png){kind=link}
_Giving_directions_reading_passage.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_logo.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_02.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Files in Category:ICTV (Ukraine)
[edit]First published 2016-08-30 [1], uploaded by a serial copyright violator.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Xunks (talk) 03:52, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 04:12, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
my brother uploaded this to my account as a stupid prank. please delete this, as i didn’t give him permission to post this on here. Flameon393 (talk) 03:12, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Delete per nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:39, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 07:47, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
FAKE from fake-maker vandals, see [2]. 220 infantry division is also a FAKE.
- File:F05 08 38 WolframRichthofen.jpg
- File:Autograph of Wilhelm von Wallenrichten.jpg
- File:220rh Infantry division.jpg
Bilderling (talk) 05:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 12:36, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
_(HY).svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(HY).svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The file has technical problem, the another version of the file was uploaded. GeoO (talk) 05:14, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
_(hy).png){kind=link}
_(HY).svg){kind=link}
- Delete per nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:37, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 12:37, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
_(HY).svg){kind=link}
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 05:59, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 12:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable organization. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:07, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 12:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:17, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 12:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 12:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 12:46, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Maha kalu sinhalaya (talk · contribs)
[edit]Truncated screenshot, no suggestion that the original text or usericon is freely licenced. Also out of COM:SCOPE as "nothing educational other than raw text" if the only non-text content here is a usericon.
Lord Belbury (talk) 12:55, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
The content contains valuable evidence of Ehelepola Wijesundara Correct full name.This was screenshot through a facebook post that was shares publicly by the official Dalada Maligawa Page. The text and the content was intended to be freely licenced. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 219.88.174.245 (talk) 13:14, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- Can you share proof of the claimed licensing? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 00:44, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. No answer to the last question about evidence for the claimed free licensing. --Rosenzweig τ 18:58, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Maha kalu sinhalaya (talk · contribs)
[edit]Same as above: out of COM:SCOPE text with a no-permission usericon.
Lord Belbury (talk) 07:07, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete; doesn't look like there is permission for the text either. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 08:14, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 12:48, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Not hosting 46.56.241.223 07:39, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 12:49, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
unused personal photo. Out of the project scope. Commons is not a private photo album Estopedist1 (talk) 09:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 12:50, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Because it’s fake and the Seven Regional stations don’t use this logo. Bassie f (talk) 09:42, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: Logo has been removed from en:Prime7 and is not to be found on 7's websites. Seems indeed to be faked. --Achim55 (talk) 10:52, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 12:51, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
useless file R3dmals (talk) 11:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 12:52, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Wrong picture Jo Buffay (talk) 11:35, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 12:56, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Maxpaytonwriter (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:Scope: personal images.
MKFI (talk) 11:53, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 12:53, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Bastianagua (talk) 12:58, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request, uploader blocked indef. --Achim55 (talk) 13:42, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Advertising. See EN Wikipedia's Sockpuppet investigations for Umar77 ElusiveTaker (talk) 16:17, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, in addition OOS as it is a page of raw text. --Achim55 (talk) 16:46, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by JopkeB as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: F10 Nice portrait, might be useful. Yann (talk) 16:21, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Has a WP article. --Yann (talk) 16:24, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
it is unneccessary Baghirova (talk) 16:57, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 17:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Commons is not private photo album. Not used. Out of Commons:Project scope. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 20:14, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 06:46, 17 June 2022 UTC: CSD F10 (personal photos out of COM:SCOPE --Krdbot 13:28, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Commons is not private photo album. Not used. Out of Commons:Project scope. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 16:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, by sock of locked User:Abdur9470. --Achim55 (talk) 18:06, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Dubious license claim; no evidence of actual free license status presented Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Keep These are all pre 1962 and would require renewal. I am not seeing evidence of renewal for anything published by the Daily News Foreign Service or the named author. --RAN (talk) 05:23, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: License & other info corrected thanks to RAN. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:14, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Webpage is copyrighted. Champion (Talk) 10:47, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Yann at 12:56, 16 September 2022 UTC: as per COM:SPEEDY. --Krdbot 19:32, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
je n'ai plus besoin de cela. Xuvier (talk) 22:10, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:43, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
POur inutilité Xuvier (talk) 16:21, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Rosenzweig τ 18:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
aucune utilité Xuvier (talk) 19:10, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep This is the third time you've nominated this for deletion for no good reason and the second time you've claimed it was useless. There's nothing useless about this street scene. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:47, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Speedy Kept: C'est utile. In scope; no valid reason for deletion. On Commons far too long to be deleted simply by uploader request without any reason. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:20, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Empty file. 95.52.115.241 23:40, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Achim55 (talk) 06:42, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Nk as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%BB+%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2+%D1%86%D0%B0%D1%80+%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%8F%D0%BD The actual source is here. How old is this painting? Yann (talk) 16:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Per edit description here [3] (confirmed by the Google search above) the author is bg:Васил Горанов, an artist born in 1972 and well alive. --Спас Колев (talk) 08:26, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:42, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Dubious license claim; no evidence of actual free license status presented Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:25, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
![03:25, 16 September 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/09/16#c-Infrogmation-20220916032500-File:"Nixon_Gets_1st_Last_of_Latin_Difficulties"_article.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep The business entity is "Daily News Foreign Service" and no renewals are listed for them. They are associated with The Chicago Daily News, which also did not renew copyrights for issues, so PD up to 1962, I also checked to see if this particular article may have been renewed, but I do not see it in the database. They did renew several articles by MacKinlay Kantor and Vincent Starrett over the years, perhaps contractually obliged to do so. Newsmen who write books tend to copyright their material, they see the possibility of downstream revenue. --RAN (talk) 04:46, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: License and info corrected by RAN. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 13:23, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
![13:23, 17 September 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/09/16#c-Infrogmation-20220917132300-File:"Nixon_Gets_1st_Last_of_Latin_Difficulties"_article.jpg){kind=link}
Out of Wikimedia Commons' scope. 听风吹过的声音 (talk) 12:02, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep,all images on the website(Qiuwen baike) that are considered as 'illegal' in the PRC will be replaced with this iamge, it's necessary in introducing the website's censorship system. Shinohara Chihiro (talk) 12:25, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:01, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
Out of Wikimedia Commons' scope. 听风吹过的声音 (talk) 12:02, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- KeepAll images on the website(Qiuwen baike) considered as violated copyright will be blocked and replaced with this image, the image is necessary in introducing the website's censorship system. Shinohara Chihiro (talk) 12:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — billinghurst sDrewth 01:01, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by AudeCathare (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos. One is duplicate. Should be in SVG if useful.
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:49, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:42, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by AudeCathare
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos. One is duplicate. Should be in SVG if useful. AudeCathare (talk) 17:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:42, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by AudeCathare
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos. One is duplicate. Should be in SVG if useful. AudeCathare (talk) 17:07, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:40, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Marked as own work despite being a magazine photoshoot. User's other recent uploads have been deleted for likely copyright violations as well. Cerebral726 (talk) 17:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by EugeneZelenko at 15:40, 19 September 2022 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing (F1): Promo/press photo --Krdbot 19:28, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
File:A scene in the music video where Jennie raps while sitting on a diamond-encrusted tank.jpg
[edit]
The file is non-free and should be uploaded locally under a fair use license on the English Wikipedia, through the File Upload Wizard. -Harbouri (alt) (talk) 16:04, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Hekerui. --Rosenzweig τ 12:12, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Requesting deletion of my own file to make space for new upload under the same name in order to correct a mistake Mushushu (talk) 22:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Metadata removed in a new file revision and oversight done. --Raymond 07:46, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:22, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:24, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:29, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:27, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:28, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:27, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:34, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:31, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:40, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:33, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused personal logo, out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:41, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:33, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:36, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:34, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Serena Martin Dass (talk · contribs)
[edit]SD|F10 (personal photos by non-contributors)
JopkeB (talk) 13:52, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by AniruddhaDey1987 (talk · contribs)
[edit]SD|F10 (personal photos by non-contributors)
JopkeB (talk) 13:56, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Low quality, likely ripoff of family guy and outside project scope Poliocretes (talk) 14:07, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:38, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Personal photo without educational use Drakosh (talk) 14:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:38, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by LeticiaDGoncalves10 (talk · contribs)
[edit]SD|F10 (personal photos by non-contributors)
JopkeB (talk) 14:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:43, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by MasterWin123 (talk · contribs)
[edit]SD|F10 (personal photos by non-contributors)
JopkeB (talk) 14:22, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:45, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos of questionable notability. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:40, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:41, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by LorenzoPerucci (talk · contribs)
[edit]SD|F10 (personal photos by non-contributors)
JopkeB (talk) 14:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:45, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Accidental upload. Not useful for wikimedia commons Wolfy13399 (talk) 14:52, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:48, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE as pure text. Lord Belbury (talk) 15:18, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:48, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Text-only file, not in use, out of scope as excluded educational content. Chiolite (talk) 16:24, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:49, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:10, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:50, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
bad quality, © 2022 Copyright Hampton Lighting Advice Polarlys (talk) 20:14, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. It is indeed a very low quality photo and all of the uploader's contributions involve advertising Hampton Bay replacement parts from hamptonlightingadvice.com. Marbletan (talk) 12:47, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:53, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
out of Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 20:15, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. The sole purpose of this file appears to be an attempt to drive traffic to the linked website. All of the uploader's contributions involve advertising Hampton Bay replacement parts from hamptonlightingadvice.com. Marbletan (talk) 12:48, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:56, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
out of Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 20:15, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. The sole purpose of this file appears to be an attempt to drive traffic to the linked website. All of the uploader's contributions involve advertising Hampton Bay replacement parts from hamptonlightingadvice.com. I think the following two files should also be deleted for the same reason:
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:55, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:53, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:21, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:58, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:25, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:58, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:25, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:59, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:59, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:30, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:59, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:30, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:00, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo, no educational value, out of scope. Zafer (talk) 20:34, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:00, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:37, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:57, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo, no educational value, out of scope. Zafer (talk) 20:39, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:00, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo, no educational value, out of scope. Zafer (talk) 20:39, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:01, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:40, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:01, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:56, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:02, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:59, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:03, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 21:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:04, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 21:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:04, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 22:06, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:04, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 22:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:06, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
low res, out of focus. Easily replaced by many similar photos on Commons Oaktree b (talk) 22:41, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
![22:41, 16 September 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/09/16#c-Oaktree_b-20220916224100-File:"First_Snowfall"_(26462562610).jpg){kind=link}
- Delete Quite beautiful, so I would have voted to keep it, but unfortunately, it has a watermark. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:28, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:09, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
![08:09, 23 September 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/09/16#c-George_Chernilevsky-20220923080900-File:"First_Snowfall"_(26462562610).jpg){kind=link}
Unused personal image, out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 22:51, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:09, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused personal image, out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 22:52, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:09, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused personal image, out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 23:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:10, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for "graphic works" in New Zealand A1Cafel (talk) 02:36, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 20:34, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for "graphic works" in New Zealand A1Cafel (talk) 02:37, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 20:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for "graphic works" in New Zealand A1Cafel (talk) 02:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 20:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in Japan A1Cafel (talk) 02:44, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 20:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 02:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 20:40, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
It's too big. 176.76.45.206 07:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
OK .. and it is duplicate. --Hladnikm (talk) 07:24, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Comment "It's too big" is a pretty strange deletion reason, and it's not very big, anyway. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:35, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Strakhov (talk) 20:43, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Cutekosto3 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Images possibly found online rather than taken by the uploader. Different styles and mostly low res with no EXIF and the two watermarked images have different watermarks, File:Primaryschool1.jpg is "S F Photography", File:Udoyon.jpg is "MS Mahmud", neither of which matches the uploader username.
- File:Primaryschool1.jpg
- File:Mosq1.jpg
- File:Math1.jpg
- File:Udoyon.jpg
- File:Atrai.jpg
- File:Kosai.webp
Lord Belbury (talk) 08:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Strakhov (talk) 20:44, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE due to unusable quality.-- 2003:D2:1F33:2715:3ABF:30C5:9A32:9F1A 10:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Very low quality, however, in use on v:cs:Kanalizační přípojka/Juandev/Ucpaná přípojka. --Achim55 (talk) 10:58, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- I have just discovered there are Wikipedia articles on the topic and if this file would be unused I wouldn't mind, but if it is used I should vote for Keep ing it. The above point about unusability and scope is thus false. Juandev (talk) 11:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: in use. --Strakhov (talk) 20:46, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Picture of a totally irrelevant bank branch, SCOPE 80.187.99.86 13:17, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Decent picture, no reason to delete in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Strakhov (talk) 20:47, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Irrellevant image of shop 80.187.99.86 13:18, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep: Kein Löschgrund. Die RK von de:wp gelten hier nicht. --Achim55 (talk) 13:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Nothing amazing but could possibly be useful. We need to be imaginative and realize that the scope of human knowledge is vast and the scope of possibly usable photos is almost as broad. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:02, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Strakhov (talk) 20:48, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
It is not clear what this artwork is supposed to represent. According to the file description, it is supposed to be a "portrait" but it really doesn't look like one. I believe this picture is out of scope for not being educationally useful. Chiolite (talk) 15:41, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep In use on the user page of an active de.wikipedia user. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:51, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per Ikan Kekek. --Strakhov (talk) 20:48, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
pour inutilité Xuvier (talk) 16:20, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
- Je ne comprend pas ta demande. La photo est utilisée dans l'article Caducée. --H2O(talk) 17:10, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
- je comprends, mais vu que ces gens comment ils ont supprimé tout ce que j'ai écrit, cela m'a bcp dérangé. Du coup je voudrais supprimer cette image. Xuvier (talk) 09:13, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Rosenzweig τ 18:39, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
aucune utilité Xuvier (talk) 19:14, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Pas un argument pour la suppression. --H2O(talk) 19:57, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Useful, per Jmh2o, and this is the same argument you used unsuccessfully in January. Do you plan on trying the same argument again in a few months? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:31, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Strakhov (talk) 20:50, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
unlikely to be own work Didym (talk) 19:49, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Strakhov (talk) 20:51, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
_logo_transparent.png){kind=link}
_logo_transparent.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:58, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
_logo_transparent.png){kind=link}
- Baseless deletion request, see Administrators' noticeaboard. The nominator removed the file's use on Wikidata to justify this deletion request. --Veikk0.ma (talk) 04:51, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. At moment the file is used in Wikidata. Taivo (talk) 06:55, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, in use on Wikidata. Derby is a major provider of shaving supplies, so unlikely to be deleted there. — Huntster (t @ c) 21:39, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep notable company --Ooligan (talk) 16:43, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: in use. --Strakhov (talk) 20:51, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
_logo_transparent.png){kind=link}
These images are all claimed to be own work, but there is doubt on this. File:Hathidah Jn.jpg is actually an unattributed lower res copy of File:Hathidah junction.jpeg. It raises doubts about the own work claim on the others.
Whpq (talk) 02:20, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:12, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Copyrigyted poster. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:08, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Unsourced images, possible copyvio. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:08, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighted poster. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Low resolution with no EXIF data. Possible copyvio. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Low resolution with no EXIF data. Possible copyvio. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
There is a better version and this one is unused. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:32, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
There is a better version and this one is unused. Nanahuatl (talk) 06:32, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Unlike that own work. Per TinEye search, image from Internet. Single contribution by this user. VRT-permission is needed Estopedist1 (talk) 07:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:07, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused files. Out of project scope due to bad quality (first image). Complex logos can be in Commons only with VRT-permission.
- File:Cbk(MONITORING DAN EVALUASI).jpeg
- File:MODELASI STRATEGI.jpeg
- File:K vision @ k satelit(MODELASI).png
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Estopedist1 (talk) 07:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:07, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
The meal-shots on the depicted board/poster are above COM:TOO and hereby copyrighted. Regrettably, there is no freedom-of-panorama exception for such 2D-works in Hongkong. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:50, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:07, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work. Photos with questionable copyright status available on different sources. Some of them out of scope.
- File:NewYearsMurders2023.png
- File:Fl-boca-pentagram-final-day-20170107.jpg
- File:GalebNikacevicJPG.webp
- File:UT666.jpg
- File:Sexy77.jpg
- File:ValentinaPosingWithGuitar.jpg
- File:VJD.jpg
- File:ValentinaCoverUp.jpg
- File:PictureBeforeDisaester.jpg
- File:ValentinaJadeDiorSelfie2022.jpg
- File:CLW Logo Flag.png
Smooth O (talk) 09:50, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:08, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Tylermastmusic (talk · contribs)
[edit]Album cover and publicity photographs. VRT permission needed to verify copyright.
MKFI (talk) 11:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Ticket:2022091910012751 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 22:00, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Permission available. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:09, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused screenshot of questionable notability. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:09, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Fake SVG, unused for two years. Leonel Sohns 15:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:09, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
_Giving_directions_reading_passage.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Giving_directions_reading_passage.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Text-only file, not in use, out of scope as excluded educational content. Chiolite (talk) 16:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
_Giving_directions_reading_passage.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:09, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
_Giving_directions_reading_passage.png){kind=link}
Per COM:PACKAGE A1Cafel (talk) 16:02, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:09, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Grandcaterers (talk · contribs)
[edit]These files are merely advertisements for Grand Caterers, a company which matches the uploader's username.
- File:Event Management by The Grand Caterers.jpg
- File:Wedding Arrangements by The Grand Caterers.jpg
- File:Wedding Planne The Grand Caterers & Decorators.JPG
- File:Wedding Planner - The Grand Caterers & Decorators.jpg
- File:Sunset Club Karachi.jpg
Marbletan (talk) 19:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:08, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
The SVG version exists and this one is unused. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
The SVG version exists and this one is unused. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:10, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by AntiCompositeBot as no license (User:AntiCompositeBot/NoLicense/tag). Likely PD in the US, unsure about Turkey. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 04:16, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Kept: below TOO. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:15, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:13, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Files by Alirezaamidi
[edit]- File:Alireza Amidi Advance Paragliding,Paramotoring,Speedriding,Paraski Instructor.jpg
- File:Alireza Amidi Hang gliding.jpg
- File:Alireza Amidi Utah First Place 2013.jpg
- File:Alireza Amidi Advance Flight Instructor.jpg
- File:Alireza Amidi NASA.jpg
Unused personal files. Out of scope. --Cryptic-waveform (talk) 20:34, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:10, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
The SVG version exists and this one is unused. Nanahuatl (talk) 22:06, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 22:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 22:12, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
ファイル名を間違えました Tori30 (talk) 05:06, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Mistyping the filename is no reason to delete; just request a filename change. What is the correct filename? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- @30-tori ファイル名は変更できますので削除する必要はありません。Commons:ファイルの改名#改名方法をご覧下さい。 Adeletron 3030 (talk) 12:00, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
- Kept, no reason to remove this. The file is renamed. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 17:56, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Done
screenshots from YouTube. Please show that the videos are published under Commons Creative licenses
Estopedist1 (talk) 07:04, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- the two picture are under commons license.Trappism (talk) 07:47, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination Thanks, @Trappism! My bad! Estopedist1 (talk) 17:24, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Nomination was withdraw. --Érico (talk) 01:08, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Seems to be copyvio going by the description. Telaneo (User talk page) 09:34, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 08:53, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Source is unclear but appears to be taken from the web. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 12:10, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 08:59, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation. This photo is also on https://www.edhat.com/news/point-conception, so I doubt whether this is "ovwn work" of the uploader. JopkeB (talk) 13:47, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 08:59, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Not a work by Tasnim, also available on IRNA without a watermark: https://en.irna.ir/news/84365836/Dena-destroyer-Shahin-minesweeper-join-Iran-navy-units HeminKurdistan (talk) 17:14, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 09:08, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by 1950256taka (talk · contribs)
[edit]All of the user's other uploads were web downloads. No evidence that these are any different.
Adeletron 3030 (talk) 17:21, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 09:08, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
literally ripped from the MED-EL website home page RespectCE (talk) 18:23, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 09:09, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
doubtful to be "own work" considering the poor resolution, uploaded by prolific copyright violator RespectCE (talk) 18:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 09:10, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
NOT "own work", image originally from MED-EL RespectCE (talk) 18:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 09:11, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
NOT own work but of MED-EL, uploaded by prolific copyright violator RespectCE (talk) 18:29, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 09:11, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Stolen from MED-EL, as usual RespectCE (talk) 18:30, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 09:11, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
This uploader has a number of image questinably uploaded as "own work." It's not obvious when this work was taken as I can't tell when the person it depicts passed away. Ricky81682 (talk) 22:20, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 09:13, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Taken from the organization's website. Copyvio. Nanahuatl (talk) 23:02, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- öncelikle merhaba çalışmalarımı canva üzerinde tasarlıyorum ama çalışmalarımın lisans sahibiyim sebep şu canva üzerinden yapılan çalışmalar çalışmayı yapan içerik üreticisini CC hakkı tanımıştır. bu maddelerde resmen belirtilmiştir. BİRLEŞİK HALKLAR İNSANİ YARDIM DERNEĞİ KURUCUSUYUM ADIM :ÖZGÜR MUTLU Ozgurmutlu1990 (talk) 08:59, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 09:13, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Taken from the organization's website. Copyvio. Nanahuatl (talk) 23:02, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- öncelikle merhaba çalışmalarımı canva üzerinde tasarlıyorum ama çalışmalarımın lisans sahibiyim sebep şu canva üzerinden yapılan çalışmalar çalışmayı yapan içerik üreticisini CC hakkı tanımıştır. bu maddelerde resmen belirtilmiştir. BİRLEŞİK HALKLAR İNSANİ YARDIM DERNEĞİ KURUCUSUYUM ADIM :ÖZGÜR MUTLU Ozgurmutlu1990 (talk) 09:00, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 09:14, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Movie poster - not a free file - This is not the place for it. Ldorfman (talk) 23:21, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 09:14, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Violetcabra (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagrams. Should be in SVG if useful.
- File:Psyche mandala.jpg
- File:Jung archetype mandala.jpg
- File:Hexafoil construction with inner lines drawn.jpg
- File:Diagram of the Planes of being in Western Occultism.jpg
- File:Vesica piscis square proof.jpg
- File:Inner 24 point star from hexafoil construction.jpg
- File:24 mandala quadruple elaboration.jpg
- File:24 Mandala double elaboration.jpg
- File:Trefoil with marked bisection of circle with points of vesica piscis.jpg
- File:DOUBLE-TRIPLE dodeca-hexafoil.jpg
- File:Triple dodecamandala.jpg
- File:Double hexafoil mandala elaboration.jpg
- File:12 Hexafoil Mandala.jpg
- File:Sacred geometry elaboration.jpg
- File:Vesica Piscis Sequence ten.jpg
- File:Vesica Piscis Sequence nine.jpg
- File:Vesica Piscis Sequence eight.jpg
- File:Vesica Piscis Sequence seven.jpg
- File:Vesica Piscis Sequence six.jpg
- File:Vesica Piscis Sequence five.jpg
- File:Vesica Piscis Sequence four.jpg
- File:Vesica Piscis Sequence one.jpg
- File:Vesica Piscis Sequence three.jpg
- File:Vesica Piscis Sequence two.jpg
- File:EIGHT-FOLD HEXAFOIL CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT INNER CIRCLE.jpg
- File:DOUBLE HEXAFOIL CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT INNER CIRCLE.jpg
- File:FOUR-FOLD HEXAFOIL CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT INNER CIRCLE.jpg
- File:Four-fold hexafoil construction.jpg
- File:Eight-fold hexafoil construction.jpg
- File:Double hexafoil construction.jpg
- File:9th level concentric circle hexafoil construction.jpg
- File:Concentric circle hexafoil construction.jpg
- File:Quadruple hexafoil mandala.jpg
- File:Triple hexafoil mandala.jpg
- File:Double hexafoil mandala.jpg
- File:Vertical hexafoil.png
- File:6 vertical hexafoil elaboration &c.jpg
- File:5 vertical hexafoil elaboration.jpg
- File:4 fourth step vertical hexafoil creation.jpg
- File:1 vesica piscis vertical orientation.jpg
- File:2 quatrefoil vertical orientation.jpg
- File:3 third step vertical hexafoil creation.jpg
- File:Vesica piscis tiling step one.jpg
- File:Hexafoil tiling.jpg
- File:Vesica piscis angle shift.jpg
- File:Colorful hexafoil mandala.jpg
- File:Formal Hexafoil Mandala.jpg
- File:Orthogonal Vesica Piscis.jpg
- File:Triple Hexagon of circles.jpg
- File:Double Hexagon of Circles.jpg
- File:Hexagon of Circles.jpg
- File:Base 10 circle triangle.jpg
- File:Circle hour glass vesica piscis construction.jpg
- File:15 level circle diamond construction.jpg
- File:Vesica Piscis Square Proof.jpg
- File:13 level circle diamond construction.jpg
- File:Circle Diamond Pyramid 9th level.jpg
- File:9th level circle pyramid.jpg
- File:8th Level Circle Pyramid.jpg
- File:7 fifth level circle pyramid.jpg
- File:4 quatrefoil.jpg
- File:5 third level circle pyramid.jpg
- File:6 fourth level circle pyramic.jpg
- File:2 Vesica piscis.jpg
- File:3 trefoil.jpg
- File:1 circle.jpg
- File:Regular Pentagram.jpg
- File:Hexafoil.jpg
- File:Hexafoil Tiling.jpg
- File:Sunflower hexafoil.jpg
- File:Four Circles Hexafoil Construction.jpg
- File:Four Circles.jpg
- File:Hexafoil Drawing Sequence.jpg
- File:Simple Square Geometric Proof.jpg
- File:Cleaned up 12 point hexafoil image.jpg
- File:Cleaned up 24 point Hexafoil.jpg
- File:48 point hexafoil design.jpg
- File:Vesica piscis with radius.jpg
- File:12 point hexafoil.jpg
- File:24 point hexafoil.jpg
- File:20210228 193913-page-001.jpg
- File:Geometric proof for square.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- the image File:Hexafoil Drawing Sequence.jpg is in use on two Wikipedia pages:
- https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hexafolio
- and
- https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%98%E3%82%AD%E3%82%B5%E3%83%95%E3%82%A9%E3%82%A4%E3%83%AB
- The image File:13 level circle diamond construction.jpg is in use on one Wikipedia page:
- https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%98%E3%82%AD%E3%82%B5%E3%83%95%E3%82%A9%E3%82%A4%E3%83%AB Violetcabra (talk) 20:53, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- the File:Vesica piscis square proof.jpg demonstrates visually the mathematical property of the square within a Vesica Piscis. This property has tremendous importance in the symbolism of the Vesica Piscis, especially but not only as it relates to Christianity, which makes great use of the Vesica Piscis. I've included this image on the Wikipedia page for the Vesica Piscis in the section on symbolism to demonstrate it's educational worth. Violetcabra (talk) 23:13, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- I've also added an image of File:Vesica piscis square proof.jpg to https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesica_piscis#Significado_m%C3%ADstico_y_religioso to demonstrate it's educational worth in demonstrating the mystical and religious significance of the image. Violetcabra (talk) 23:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- the image File:Regular Pentagram.jpg I think should remain --- it is a well drawn regular pentagram, excellent for educational purposes. I have edited the Spanish language Wikipedia entry on Estrella Pentagonal to include the image. Violetcabra (talk) 18:11, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- I've added image DOUBLE-TRIPLE dodeca-hexafoil.jpg to the Wikipedia page on Sacred Geometry as the image illustrates the mathematical elaboration of simple shapes to form beautiful images. Violetcabra (talk) 23:03, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 20:00, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Suspicious own work claim. MKFI (talk) 11:51, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:36, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
montagged picture unlikely to be own work, low resolution, no metadata HeminKurdistan (talk) 12:36, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:35, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Appears to be a derivative work of this profile photo: https://twitter.com/EricxBlack/photo Adeletron 3030 (talk) 14:28, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:33, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation? No information given/found to judge copyright status. What is the source? Who is the artist of this drawing/print? When was it made? Where was it made/published? JopkeB (talk) 14:30, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Seems clearly old and probably PD, but someone should document the author and publication date. It might be worth posting to w:Talk:Thomas Evans (British Army officer), but whether anyone would read the post soon, who knows? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:54, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: unclear copyright status. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:32, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Possible copyvio: Screenshot of a software, Album cover CoffeeEngineer (talk) 16:20, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:23, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Miniwark as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The sculpture at the center seems to young to be public domain. Also, there is no FOP in France Yann (talk) 16:20, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: FOP issue. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:24, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
_logo.png){kind=link}
_logo.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 20:58, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
_logo.png){kind=link}
- Higher quality (smoother edges) but non-transparent version of File:Derby (Azmüsebat) logo transparent.png. Could be used for a better version in the future, thus it should stay.
- See also my note on the Administrators' noticeaboard about the the nominator's suspicious behavior in regards to the deletion request of the transparent version. --Veikk0.ma (talk) 05:02, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, in use on Wikidata. Derby is a major provider of shaving supplies, so unlikely to be deleted there. — Huntster (t @ c) 21:39, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
_logo_transparent.png){kind=link}
Kept: used. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:21, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
_logo.png){kind=link}
Copyrighted logo. Nanahuatl (talk) 22:06, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:20, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
copyright violation - http://www.tta.gov.tr Reality006 (talk) 20:51, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
- Keep {{PD-textlogo}}. --Walter Siegmund (talk) 19:21, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
- Keep PD-textlogo. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:54, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
The SVG version exists and this one is unused. Nanahuatl (talk) 22:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:20, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo. Nanahuatl (talk) 22:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:19, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
It is completely unknown where this work came from. Iyer died in 1968 but this does not look like an image of a 71-year-old so it was probably taken before and there's no information other than the uploader's "own work" statement. It is used in a number of Wikis but on English at least it would be non-free fair use claim. I don't know about the other wikis. Ricky81682 (talk) 22:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - unclear copyright status. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:19, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
This is an image of a public mural taken in the United States. However, U.S. freedom of panorama does not cover public artwork (COM:FOP US) —Bagumba (talk) 23:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:16, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative work of non-free content (F3) 61.120.241.1 23:44, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- No FoP for 2D works in Japan. --61.120.241.1 05:02, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:14, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
1958 Miami Herald newspaper. Certainly not CC licensed; no evidence of other free status offered. Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:23, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:00, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 02:46, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:10, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 02:47, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:10, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for "graphic works" in Hong Kong A1Cafel (talk) 02:56, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:10, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for "graphic works" in Hong Kong A1Cafel (talk) 02:58, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:10, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
No FoP in France. Architect I. M. Pei died in 2019, still within the 70 p.m.a. of the country A1Cafel (talk) 03:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:20, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
No FoP in France. Architect I. M. Pei died in 2019, still within the 70 p.m.a. of the country A1Cafel (talk) 03:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:20, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for "graphic works" in Hong Kong A1Cafel (talk) 03:05, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Mongolia A1Cafel (talk) 03:08, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
- Undeleted Mongolia now has FOP for buildings and 3D art. Abzeronow (talk) 17:26, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Mongolia A1Cafel (talk) 03:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
- Undeleted Mongolia now has FOP for buildings and 3D art. Abzeronow (talk) 17:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Mongolia A1Cafel (talk) 03:10, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Mongolia A1Cafel (talk) 03:10, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
The sculpture seems to be a non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 03:21, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
A derivative. No FoP in Ukraine for artworks like this. Xunks (talk) 03:29, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:56, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
Artwork on the Fourth Plinth is temporarily, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 03:33, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
Artwork on the Fourth Plinth is temporarily, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 03:35, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
seems to be from here: https://sh-kunst.de/ulrich-beier-sonnenuhr/#jp-carousel-1513 Avron (talk) 08:04, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:57, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP in Iran. Aurelio de Sandoval (Mensajes aquí please) 21:33, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP in Iran. Aurelio de Sandoval (Mensajes aquí please) 21:35, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Dubious license claim; no evidence of actual free license status presented Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:26, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
These sculptures appears to be temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 10:31, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:58, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
These sculptures appears to be temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 10:31, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:58, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Small photo without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. I suspect not own work, but copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 14:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:50, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
CC0 license was excluded in August 2015 for photographs, thus the image fails COM:L A1Cafel (talk) 15:36, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:51, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Image above meets the threshold of originality since the coat of arms in the seal is complex. Seems like a copyvio. EdTre (talk) 17:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Low quality. Superseded by File:Bramham Park.png. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 11:02, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep The upload log entry for File:Bramham Park.png states that it is a derivative of File:Bramham Park 5.gif. This image is necessary to preserve attribution. -FASTILY 07:17, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
no permission from persgroep.nl and serious concerns whether this is a legit image or meant to discredit this existing journalist Hoyanova (talk) 09:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, no evidence of permission. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:29, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Grainy, low res image of any old car. 80.187.99.86 13:20, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --shizhao (talk) 07:24, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
Flickwashing, the source Flickr account has the same username as the uploader and this image was uploaded today. Appears as an official publicity shot at https://www.facebook.com/kombinaciya/photos/pb.100064113126237.-2207520000../2722883694524544/?type=3 Lord Belbury (talk) 11:06, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:27, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
wrong picture Jo Buffay (talk) 13:24, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:28, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
photo from Alexander's personal page from VK — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 94.243.59.249 (talk) 04:18, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 04:53, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Obsoleted by File:Banderola_Jornadas_WMES_2022_01.png —Ismael Olea (talk) 09:42, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:22, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Source unknown Thyj (talk) 09:49, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:22, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
photos from the website RCRS 94.243.59.249 04:39, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
the source provided says nothing about the date of publication that is crucial for PD in Russia. The person died in 1943 and it highly likely that the publication isn't old enough to automatically qualify for PD status rubin16 (talk) 13:23, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- I will write in Russian. На сайте ([4]) источником фотографии указана книга[1]. Скорее всего в этой книге (
стр. 179раздел «Источники и литература») будет указан год создания фото. Нужны страницы этой книги. Jolf Staler (talk) 14:30, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 17:45, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Image is to blurry to be useful for anything and it's not of Redding anyway. Also, Commons isn't a personal file host. So it should be deleted as OOS. Same goes for File:Redding, CA, USA - panoramio (9).jpg. Adamant1 (talk) 09:28, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
- Comment Perfectly usable as a thumbnail of the stream, but where is the stream? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:05, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- The file has the coordinates. It's somewhere along CA 89 somewhere, but it looks like the stream isn't named. That said, who would just use it for a thumbnail? No offense, but that's kind of a mediocre reason to keep an image. The point in Commons isn't to be a thumbnail database of otherwise unusable images. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:07, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- Are you aware of COM:VIC, where we judge precisely which images are most useful at thumbnail size, and are you aware of how images are used in Wikipedia articles or on most blogs? Usability at thumbnail size is all that's needed for 99% or more of online articles. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:49, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- Yes I am. Is this image being used in a Wikipedia article or does it have any possibility of ever being used in one though? The answer to the first one is no, and I can almost guarantee the same goes for the second one since there's nothing within at least a couple of miles of where this image was taken that's notable enough to have an article. The closest notable place is Old Station, California and it would be laughable to include this image in it's article. Really it would be laughable to include it in any article. Other then that I don't really care if thumbnail size is all that's needed for 99% or more of online articles, because this discussion isn't about the merits of specific images sizes. Blurry images are deleted all the time regardless of if other sites might use them or not. It's not like those websites can't get the image from somewhere else if they want to. Do you have a point that's actually relevant or is all you have to say about this off-topic, pointless hypotheticals? --Adamant1 (talk) 09:12, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- Any stream is a potential encyclopedia subject, and a usable picture of one could be passed at COM:VIC if its name were given. And as you know, images don't have to be currently in use on any other site to not be deleted. And I'm sorry you find my non-deletionism annoying, "off-topic" and "pointless", whereas it actually goes to the heart of what Commons is. My belief is that potentially usable images that are properly licensed should not be deleted. You evidently have a less broad view of what that scope consists of. So it would be better for you to debate that question in good faith instead of trying to argue that a photo is unusable because you believe it's unusable and arguments to the contrary are, essentially, stupid. The decision on whether to delete should be left to a third party to judge. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:21, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- It would be better for you to debate that question in good faith instead of....believe it's unusable and arguments to the contrary are, essentially, stupid. It's not that I think the argument it could be used in a Wikipedia article is stupid, just wrong. There are no article that it can be used in. Which is why I pointed out where the stream is located and what places that have articles are close to it. If this comes down to using it in a generic article about "streams" then I assume there's much better, non-blurry, images that can and are being used for that. Like I said, blurry images are deleted all the time. Especially when there's non-blurry available and in this case there's a dearth of images for random streams on here. In no way does that come down to me just saying "your arguments are just stupid mah!" or whatever. It's rather bad faithed to interpreted what I said that way.
- Any stream is a potential encyclopedia subject, and a usable picture of one could be passed at COM:VIC if its name were given. And as you know, images don't have to be currently in use on any other site to not be deleted. And I'm sorry you find my non-deletionism annoying, "off-topic" and "pointless", whereas it actually goes to the heart of what Commons is. My belief is that potentially usable images that are properly licensed should not be deleted. You evidently have a less broad view of what that scope consists of. So it would be better for you to debate that question in good faith instead of trying to argue that a photo is unusable because you believe it's unusable and arguments to the contrary are, essentially, stupid. The decision on whether to delete should be left to a third party to judge. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:21, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- Yes I am. Is this image being used in a Wikipedia article or does it have any possibility of ever being used in one though? The answer to the first one is no, and I can almost guarantee the same goes for the second one since there's nothing within at least a couple of miles of where this image was taken that's notable enough to have an article. The closest notable place is Old Station, California and it would be laughable to include this image in it's article. Really it would be laughable to include it in any article. Other then that I don't really care if thumbnail size is all that's needed for 99% or more of online articles, because this discussion isn't about the merits of specific images sizes. Blurry images are deleted all the time regardless of if other sites might use them or not. It's not like those websites can't get the image from somewhere else if they want to. Do you have a point that's actually relevant or is all you have to say about this off-topic, pointless hypotheticals? --Adamant1 (talk) 09:12, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- Are you aware of COM:VIC, where we judge precisely which images are most useful at thumbnail size, and are you aware of how images are used in Wikipedia articles or on most blogs? Usability at thumbnail size is all that's needed for 99% or more of online articles. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:49, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- The file has the coordinates. It's somewhere along CA 89 somewhere, but it looks like the stream isn't named. That said, who would just use it for a thumbnail? No offense, but that's kind of a mediocre reason to keep an image. The point in Commons isn't to be a thumbnail database of otherwise unusable images. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:07, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- Like Commons:Deletion requests says "the burden of showing that the file can be validly hosted here lies with the uploader and anyone arguing that it should be kept." Personally, I don't think your doing that by making vague appeals about the file might be worth keeping because of some nonexciting use case and then straw manning my position when I refute it. To quote from Commons:Deletion requests again, "please give reasons for your opinion, preferably based on your knowledge of: any binding copyright law, the applicability of any relevant Commons policies, any relevant facts such as date or place of publication, author, date of author's death." Which one of those have you based your handwaving on exactly? --Adamant1 (talk) 23:10, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying your position, and I'm sorry I came across to you as using a straw man argument. But in case my position is not fully clear: Any stream could have its own Wikipedia article, but there being a specific article about a discrete geographic feature is not necessary for a photo of it to be educational. And the reason for my argument to keep this image deals with the question of what falls within "educational purpose" as laid out in Commons:Project scope: "The expression "educational" is to be understood according to its broad meaning of "providing knowledge; instructional or informative". My argument is simply that a usable photo of a stream is educational within that broad meaning, and that you seek to narrow that broad meaning. It's OK for us to disagree on the proper breadth of Commons scope, and as I said, the decision on whether to delete should be left to a third party to judge. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:47, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
- No worries. I appreciate the apology and further explanation though. That makes more sense. I wasn't aware that any stream could have its own Wikipedia article. Makes sense though since a lot of them are on government databases and whatnot. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:55, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
- Right. I've seen Wikipedia articles on individual streams and streets that are not famous. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:36, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
- No worries. I appreciate the apology and further explanation though. That makes more sense. I wasn't aware that any stream could have its own Wikipedia article. Makes sense though since a lot of them are on government databases and whatnot. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:55, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying your position, and I'm sorry I came across to you as using a straw man argument. But in case my position is not fully clear: Any stream could have its own Wikipedia article, but there being a specific article about a discrete geographic feature is not necessary for a photo of it to be educational. And the reason for my argument to keep this image deals with the question of what falls within "educational purpose" as laid out in Commons:Project scope: "The expression "educational" is to be understood according to its broad meaning of "providing knowledge; instructional or informative". My argument is simply that a usable photo of a stream is educational within that broad meaning, and that you seek to narrow that broad meaning. It's OK for us to disagree on the proper breadth of Commons scope, and as I said, the decision on whether to delete should be left to a third party to judge. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:47, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: No consensus to delete. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:47, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Totally pointless photograph. The blurry bush taking up the left top half of the image doesn't help any either. Plus it's not even of Redding. So it should be deleted as OOS. Adamant1 (talk) 09:30, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. It is very near Redding, so I do not think that the title is misleading. Rename it to the county if there is a concern though. Illustrates flora of the region. IronGargoyle (talk) 15:26, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: No consensus to delete. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:47, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
This group is mostly unknown, and the flag doesn't actually belond to Hamas of Iraq. Plus the group doesn't have it's own page. Throwaway865432 (talk) 10:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused, unclear scope. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Whilst the contents of the scorecard/bar graph are not copyrightable, this image contains numerous copyrighted logos, such as that of Natwest and the ECB. As such, it is a copyrighted image. 2A01:4B00:846B:4200:5D1D:F283:A072:A6E9 11:32, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep: {{PD-textlogo}}. --Achim55 (talk) 11:46, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Arguably not PD-textlogo in UK, but definitely deminimis. IronGargoyle (talk) 15:17, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per above. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:48, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Interview subject Gurbaksh Chahal uploaded a lengthy and direct clip of his appearance on the Oprah Winfrey Show to his YouTube channel in 2020. According to the Commons upload this was done under a CC-Attribution licence, but this was never confirmed by a second editor, and at the time of nomination it is under the standard YouTube licence.
If the clip was released as CC-Attribution for a time, it is unlikely that the original copyright holder of the footage (Harpo Productions, The Oprah Winfrey Network) would have allowed him to do this. Lord Belbury (talk) 12:04, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Per Commons:Copyright_rules_by_subject_matter#Drawings_based_on_photographs, a drawing based closely on a single photograph (in this case https://www.gulfbase.org/people/dr-jiri-komarek) also requires permission from the original photographer. Lord Belbury (talk) 12:13, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:48, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation: https://i0.wp.com/darnellbarkman.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Jesus-Christ-Wallpaper-salvation-soldiers-all-nations-beg-Jesus.jpg?resize=1024%2C640 HeminKurdistan (talk) 12:51, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:48, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Nondescript picture of a KFC. No relevance. 80.187.99.86 13:49, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. In use on English Wikipedia. IronGargoyle (talk) 15:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: COM:INUSE. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from mascot. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Similar request was made on File:Blooper in 2022.jpg and it survived deletion. This is the same situation. Nemov (talk) 20:35, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per Nemov. Start a COM:VPC discussion or batch DR to ensure consistency. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Rlbberlin as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: reason or source. Invalid reason for speedy. Claimed to be PD-old, please verify. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:58, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep PD-EU-no author disclosure, 70 years of protection for anonymous works. --RAN (talk) 22:02, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: PD-EU-no author disclosure. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:21, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
_02.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_02.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
I am not sure wether satelity imaginary from 1950s is free of use. Juandev (talk) 14:04, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
_02.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Satellites didn't exist in 1950 (date given in image description), but this aerial photography is of unclear source. --IronGargoyle (talk) 04:11, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
_02.jpg){kind=link}
Possible Copyright Violation. The Filename contains a copyright notice: "Margot Pilz ©2022" Fano (talk) 07:12, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Dear Fano,
- I appreciate your concern, but the author of this photo is my acquaintance. She has allowed me to use this photo. Which evidence should I to perform?
- Best wishes D.s.erp.1995 (talk) 07:37, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- @D.s.erp.1995: Please have the author send an e-mail with a permission. Please see COM:VRT for details. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 13:07, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Apparently no response to note about VRT from October 2022. --Rosenzweig τ 12:59, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unused logo of a non-notable company. Out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 05:53, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
- Keep Last I checked, sister projects' notability criteria are not applicable to Commons. Also, this icon is part of the CoreUI set of icons. -FASTILY 07:20, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Not seeing a valid rationale for deletion here. --Xover (talk) 10:18, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:11, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Sono io e vorrei che non ci fossero mie informazioni in rete, non ho più l'account con il quale l'ho creato 5.171.8.235 07:51, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- APPROVATA CANCELLAZIONE Colazzomatteo02 (talk) 08:04, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Properly licensed upload. That the subject no longer wishes to appear in the photo is not a valid reason for deletion. --Xover (talk) 10:24, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Personal photo by non-contributor, unused, uncategorized. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:13, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Aslan Meyratuly (talk · contribs)
[edit]I have concerns about the status of these files. They seem extremely likely to still be in copyright, either because the photographer cannot have died long ago enough to releae them into the public domain as they were taken in the 1950s; and also, they were clearly taken in Paris, and 1950s photographs made in France are not likely to be in the public domain yet. The reference for the first one indicates that the photographs were taken from a wide range of suspect websites which almost certainly don't own them in the first place, let alone have the clearance to share them. My suspicion is that the Dior company almost definitely holds copyright to the first image (and would be very unhappy about its inclusion here); and probably the second too.
Mabalu (talk) 09:36, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, and COM:PRP. --Xover (talk) 10:25, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
The file is completely missing any sounds. 95.52.115.241 09:52, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete The file appears broken. No sound at all even after re-transcoding. --Xover (talk) 10:29, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:13, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
CC0 license was excluded in August 2015 for photographs, thus the image fails COM:L A1Cafel (talk) 15:34, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Note that extracted image was deleted in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Troonrede 2016 (cropped).jpg. --Xover (talk) 10:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
No evidence that it is a work by Fars News. It seems that except for Iranian state television crew, no other reporters were present at the event. Fars News does not feature a picture gallery covering the event (otherwise I would have uploaded them) and this is very likely to be a screenshot from the television video. HeminKurdistan (talk) 17:23, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --Xover (talk) 11:06, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
copyright violation .bdfbarbados © 2020 FOX 52 (talk) 22:53, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. I see no plausible claim of compatible licensing. --Xover (talk) 11:12, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:15, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
por q si 177.239.46.22 06:17, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Nom appears to be nonsense. At least I see no valid rationale. --Xover (talk) 10:20, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, per xover. --Ellywa (talk) 08:45, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused what seems to be text for a name of a movie. Ricky81682 (talk) 22:25, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- This picture was created by me and used on the MCU page, where I created a table of movies from the Marvel Cinematic Universe
- https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D1%96%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82_Marvel
- Герої кіновсесвіту Marvel (2008—2019) / Heroes of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (2008-2019) Patriot of Ukraine (talk) 06:46, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Patriot of Ukraine It is not being used now and why is this at Commons? No other wiki would use any of these images and it's just basically text on a color. Ricky81682 (talk) 20:22, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Out of SCOPE, and easily reproducible using text and markup. --Xover (talk) 11:11, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
And also File:Хатія Деканоідзе у Тернополі 12 березня 2016.jpg
bad quality cropped files, I uploaded high quality this person File:Поліція Тернополя - Хатія Деканоідзе - 16039041.jpg Микола Василечко (talk) 17:02, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Against.
- These files are unique, they clearly show the microphone and the Bible, which are not on the high quality file.
- They are of sufficient quality, the category Khatia Dekanoidze from 16 Aug 2020 has files of worse quality: Khatia Dekanoidze 2016-02-12 (cropped), Khatia Dekanoidze 2016-02-12.
.jpg){kind=link}
- — Yuri V (t•c), 18:34, 16 September 2022 (UTC).
- Microphone and icon is in oryginal file File:Поліція Тернополя, виступає Хатія Деканоідзе - 16038925.jpg. --Микола Василечко (talk) 18:42, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment File:Хатія Деканоідзе у Тернополі 12 березня 2016.jpg is particularly useful and definitely should not be deleted on the incorrect basis of superfluity. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:33, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Ikan Kekek, how is it particularly useful if there is an oryginal file? --Микола Василечко (talk) 08:42, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- I didn't notice the link that file before. But in this case, I would say that a closeup can still be useful, depending on what someone wants to illustrate in an article, for example. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:47, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Delete --ViktoriaVikusia2 (talk) 08:30, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I see no problem keeping multiple photos of the same person. The quality is by no means so poor that that alone merits deletion. --Xover (talk) 11:05, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- Xover This not «multiple photos of the same person», this multiple cropped same file. --Микола Василечко (talk) 13:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Both images are used on the projects and there does not exist a copyright issue. Both files are in scope. --Ellywa (talk) 07:57, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Copyrighted banknote 66.81.171.159 18:59, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Seems to be ok per COM:CUR Euro. IronGargoyle (talk) 14:22, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- @IronGargoyle: Hmm. It does not seem to meet the conditions set forth on COM:CUR Euro, like that last bullet point. What am i missing? Xover (talk) 11:10, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- Not sure. I assumed those were just anti-counterfeiting regulations for copies that could be printed from. IronGargoyle (talk) 14:50, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- Hmm. The motivating factor is indeed anti-counterfeiting. But the banknotes' design is copyrighted, and in order for reproductions to be considered lawful they have to comply with the criteria set down in ECB/2003/4 Article 2.2:
- Not sure. I assumed those were just anti-counterfeiting regulations for copies that could be printed from. IronGargoyle (talk) 14:50, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- @IronGargoyle: Hmm. It does not seem to meet the conditions set forth on COM:CUR Euro, like that last bullet point. What am i missing? Xover (talk) 11:10, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
3. Reproductions complying with the following criteria shall be deemed lawful since there is no risk that the general public might mistake them for genuine euro banknotes:
…
(f) intangible reproductions made available electronically on websites, …, provided that:
- the word SPECIMEN is printed diagonally across the reproduction in Arial font or a font similar to Arial font. The length of the word SPECIMEN is at least 75 % of the length of the reproduction and the height of the word SPECIMEN is at least 15 % of the width of the reproduction, and is in a non-transparent (opaque) colour contrasting with the dominant colour of the respective euro banknote as specified in Article 1, and
- the resolution of the electronic reproduction in its original size does not exceed 72 dpi (dots per inch).
- I don't really see that that leaves much wiggle room. They're the competent authority to set down criteria, and these are the criteria they've set down as requirements to consider a reproduction lawful. But I find this whole "Copyrighted, but we will consider some reproductions lawful, but we'll dictate in detail what you can do with them" situation pretty weird. It sounds more like fair use than actual free licensing to me. --Xover (talk) 17:10, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- This might be a good issue to bring up to COM:VPC. I cannot imagine that the issue of loose Euro photographs (as opposed to scanned) has not come up before. IronGargoyle (talk) 17:23, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- I don't really see that that leaves much wiggle room. They're the competent authority to set down criteria, and these are the criteria they've set down as requirements to consider a reproduction lawful. But I find this whole "Copyrighted, but we will consider some reproductions lawful, but we'll dictate in detail what you can do with them" situation pretty weird. It sounds more like fair use than actual free licensing to me. --Xover (talk) 17:10, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination per discussion and per COM:PRP. Would be good to discuss through an undeletion request? What if somebody would upload a totally wrinkeled 100 Euro banknote?. --Ellywa (talk) 08:14, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Dubious license claim; no evidence of actual free license status presented Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:25, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Miami Herald did not renew copyrights. --RAN (talk) 21:54, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): Could you describe the ways in which you verified the lack of a renewal? Xover (talk) 10:17, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- Go to Wikidata for the entry "Miami Herald" then click on "Online Books" identifier which takes you to: https://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/cinfo/heraldflmiami You can do this for any publication. John Mark Ockerbloom went through the renewal database and migrated the info to his website. If "Online Books" has no entry there was no issue renewals, or no individual article renewed. He is slowly adding entries for all the publications with no entries at all. But he has entries for every publication with a renewal. Out of the thousands of newspapers and magazines, a surprisingly low number went through the expense of hiring a lawyer to renew their copyrights. Old news articles have very little post-publication value, most renewals were for literary magazines that would republish as books. National papers like the New York Times would renew, because they republished yearly indexes, movie reviews each decade, and theater reviews each decade, as books. They recognized the potential for republishing, so the expenses were worth it. I started to migrate Ockerbloom's data with his permission. I need to create a new property for "first issue renewal", but got distracted by another project at a local history archive, helping to organize their physical collection. --RAN (talk) 17:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Interesting. I believe the Associated Press wire photo would need to be out of copyright as well. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:49, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- I agree that the AP photo probably has to get cropped if this file is kept. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:10, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
- The AP rarely applies for copyrights, and for those few iconic images that they did register, they never renewed. The Library of Congress writes: "In an attempt to determine if AP/Wide World registered any copyrights and if those copyrights were renewed, Specialists in the Prints and Photographs Division of the Library of Congress searched the Copyright Office files. It was found that only a few images were registered for copyright and those copyrights were not renewed." The expense would have been enormous, since they generate over 500 images a day, and the reuse market was minimal. Instead they opted for control of the negatives, which they still do today. I recently asked them to scan a historic image for me, and they sent me a thumbnail. --RAN (talk) 16:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, very interesting. This (and your above reply to me) should be documented somewhere in relation to this file, and others for which the same applies, so that our "due diligence" is evident. But also so that others can make use of the information because it means there's rather a lot of good stuff in the PD that would otherwise be presumed to be off limits. Might even be worth a dedicated template? Xover (talk) 17:15, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- A template for AP would be a good idea, I have the info at Category:Photographs distributed by Associated Press but images are only in the category because I searched for them and added the category. The same will probably happen with a template, but the more places we put the info, the more widely read it will become, and eventually it will become common knowledge. See for instance Template:PD-Bain as a model. I will work on Template:PD-AP and add in the dates that fall into the public domain. When I see an interesting original AP/NEA/UP/UPI image on eBay I buy it and scan it, they sell for just $10. I have an interest in early aviators, and I send them to the San Diego Air and Space Museum, they rescan them and add them to Flickr Commons. --RAN (talk) 17:35, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Krd 04:29, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyright violaton. No FOP inside the Kunsthal, Rotterdam. This chair was designed by Gerrit Rietveld, who died in 1964, so less than 70 years ago. I do not see a VRT ticket. JopkeB (talk) 13:22, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- See com:casebook#Utility objects, this is a chair: an everyday Utility object.Vera (talk) 19:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
- This chair is not an everday utility object, it is rather an object of art than a chair to sit in because it is not comfortable.
- I'll go on in Dutch because that is much easier, the evidence is all in Dutch and I guess this is a case for an administrator with knowledge of copyright law of the Netherlands.
- De Nederlandse Auteurswet stelt expliciet:
- § 3. De werken, waarop auteursrecht bestaat
- Artikel 10 Onder werken van letterkunde, wetenschap of kunst verstaat deze wet: ...
- 11. werken van toegepaste kunst en tekeningen en modellen van nijverheid;
- § 3. De werken, waarop auteursrecht bestaat
- Dus de Nederlandse wet beschouwt toegepaste kunst wel als objecten waarop het auteursrecht van toepassing is.
- Daarnaast is er een vonnis ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2009:BH6546 (uit 2009), waarin het expliciet gaat over het plaatsen van foto's van een Rietveldstoel op internet-websites die mede gericht zijn op Nederland: de rechter bepaalde dat dat inbreuk op het merkrecht is, dat in handen is van de Stichting Auteursrechten G.Th. Rietveld. Ook Commons is mede gericht op Nederland. Ook al geldt in Commons voor toegepaste kunst het Amerikaanse recht, dan nog mogen foto's van een Rietveld-stoel niet worden hergebruikt op websites die mede op Nederland zijn gericht. En aangezien Commons uitgaat van vrij gebruik wereldwijd, lijkt het mij dat afbeeldingen van in ieder geval deze Rietveldstoel (en ook die met dezelfde vorm in andere kleuren) niet in Commons mogen worden opgenomen (tot 2035). En dit zal ook gelden voor veel andere afbeeldingen in Category:Chairs by Gerrit Rietveld. --JopkeB (talk) 03:19, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom / JopkeB. With the exception that the trademark-based ruling referenced is not relevant. --Xover (talk) 10:36, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. I am a bit biased, because I did sit on such a chair in somebodys home, and made this photo, long ago, 2006. So it is a utilitary object and many have been sold. Even today, you can still buy them. Many photos of this chair (colored version) are listed in Category:Red Blue chair. According to the Dutch copyright law, models and drawings are protected, but imho not the utiliatarian objects. I did find this similar DR, Commons:Deletion requests/Artworks in the MOMA. Photos of chairs have been kept. Ellywa (talk) 09:15, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- How about the schematic drawings on the walls behind and to the side of the chair then? :) Xover (talk) 13:48, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- Assuming these are from Rietveld, they will be copyrighted according Dutch copyright law. Perhaps these can be considered COM:De minimis. If not, the image has to be deleted/cropped/blurred. Ellywa (talk) 16:14, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- How about the schematic drawings on the walls behind and to the side of the chair then? :) Xover (talk) 13:48, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:30, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- ↑ Иоффе, Э. Г. (2008) (in Russian) От Мясникова до Малофеева: кто руководил БССР, Minsk: «Беларусь» ISBN: 9789850108036.