Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2022/09/27
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
out of scope Trade (talk) 00:59, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:45, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 01:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by EugeneZelenko at 01:03, 27 September 2022 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing (F1): Non-trivial corporate logo --Krdbot 07:32, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 01:02, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:44, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 01:04, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:44, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Vandalizm Duyguaktel (talk) 01:04, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Speedy keep Spurious deletion request. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Keep In use. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense request. --Achim55 (talk) 08:02, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 01:05, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:45, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Commons is not a personal host.
- File:Tama Rashid (7).jpg
- File:Tama Rashid (4).jpg
- File:Tama Rashid (3).jpg
- File:Tama Rashid (2).jpg
- File:Tama Rashid.jpg
- File:Tama Rashid (1).jpg
Afifa Afrin (talk) 13:45, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 03:27, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Out of scope - SD|F10 (personal photos by non-contributors) - not used
JopkeB (talk) 02:51, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal file Bedivere (talk) 05:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
pornographie Valferry (talk) 12:55, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: We don't censor commons. --Gbawden (talk) 12:42, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Bad quality, can hardly tell what’s going on. Whether or not it’s “porn” is irrelevant. Dronebogus (talk) 07:02, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:57, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
not notable company, crosswiki spam, see Wikidata:User_talk:Sweet_Somethings Estopedist1 (talk) 07:33, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:58, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
unused files. Also personal art. Out of project scope.
Estopedist1 (talk) 07:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 08:59, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
ffhggjiorjlçiriy_tjp588 41.200.45.115 14:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy keep, no rationale given for deletion. Image is in use on many articles and correctly licenced. --Lord Belbury (talk) 14:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense request. --Achim55 (talk) 14:48, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Because it is Press photo Kunal peter (talk) 14:06, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense request by another Android app user who could not resist. --Achim55 (talk) 14:50, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
copyvio: https://www.insidesport.co/ipl-moneyball-rishabh-pant-the-rising-star/ Zaxxon0 (talk) 06:09, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:40, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
non-free, taken from Getty Images, on sites such as https://www.cricbuzz.com/cricket-news/107180/the-making-of-rishabh-pant Lugnuts (talk) 10:12, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Deleted -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:45, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
not taken by the uploader, obvious professional image taken from elsewhere Lugnuts (talk) 18:40, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 22:59, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
Risk of copyright violation, unlikely that the YouTube channel owns the rights to this photo. Crop of a larger image published in a Tweet by the International Cricket Council, dated before the YouTube video.[1] Photo has appeared in two newspaper sites, both dated before the YouTube video.[2][3] Verbcatcher (talk) 03:21, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Also delete the cropped version File:Rishabh Pant (cropped).jpg Verbcatcher (talk) 03:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded this file years ago and now I would like it deleted asap due to bullying as a result from it Rex Da Dex (talk) 08:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Out of project scope: promotional SPAM of non-notable company George Chernilevsky talk 10:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 18:21, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Because it is Nonsense Bakay022 (talk) 16:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense request by another Android app user. --Achim55 (talk) 16:38, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Johnj1995 as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G3. The "vandalism, threat, or attack" here is not obvious to me; please elaborate. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Speedy delete per Special:Diff/692409594. —Hasley 17:59, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Thank you. Indeffed and speedied. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:44, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Johnj1995 as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G3. The "vandalism, threat, or attack" is not obvious to me; please elaborate. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:28, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete the file was uploaded by a VOA, and was used only in a vandalism page on eswiki. On a side note, even the username itself merits a block as it is derogatory. —Hasley 17:58, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Thank you. Indeffed and speedied. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:44, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Personal photo with a misleading description, this is not somebody performing anything live. Uploader appears to be a sock of User:Otiasah Miracle on enwiki. Lord Belbury (talk) 19:56, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: already. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:13, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 01:07, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:48, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope - SD|F10 (personal photos by non-contributors)
JopkeB (talk) 03:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:46, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
unused personal image. Out of project scope. Estopedist1 (talk) 09:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Very poor quality. You can hardly see what this is Ezzex (talk) 13:15, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:41, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:38, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:40, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:40, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:42, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:40, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:39, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:38, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:44, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:38, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:44, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:37, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope, sandbox have been dead for more than a year Trade (talk) 16:45, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope, promotional SPAM. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:37, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:45, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:36, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:45, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope, promotional SPAM. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:35, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:45, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope, promotional SPAM. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:35, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope, promotional SPAM. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:35, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:34, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:34, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:34, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 16:51, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope, poor quality Trade (talk) 16:51, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:32, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Personal images of non-contributors, out of scope, only used on spam drafts.
eviolite (talk) 16:56, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 17:02, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope, promotional SPAM. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 17:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope, promotional. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 17:04, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 17:05, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope, promotional. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
OOS; "Screenshot" in file name suggests DW -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:28, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 19:23, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:28, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 19:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:27, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 19:33, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:27, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 19:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope, promotional SPAM. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:26, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
unused personal photo Trade (talk) 20:08, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:24, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Obviously spam, someone complained about it over a decade ago but didn’t do anything (sigh). Dronebogus (talk) 22:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope, promotional SPAM. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
out of scope. WD item nominated for deletion Trade (talk) 22:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope, promotional SPAM. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:20, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
not good Mostfazikry (talk) 20:21, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Comment Dunno; it is in part a picture of a mummy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:36, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 08:20, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Duplicate Olga Rithme (talk) 16:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 14:43, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
copyright violation or quoting without permission from the following sources: https://kumparan.com/florespedia/lembata-tuan-rumah-etmc-2021-stadion-gelora-99-siap-tampung-3-ribu-penonton-1vHF449nW1H Oloyobuen (talk) 01:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
copyright infringement or quoting without permission from the following sources: https://kupang.tribunnews.com/2022/09/09/mengenalstadion-gelora-99-lewoleba-venue-utama-liga-3-el-tari-memorial-cup-lembata Oloyobuen (talk) 01:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:51, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation or quoting without permission from the following sources: https://www.triptrus.com/destination/2252/danau-paniai Oloyobuen (talk) 01:23, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
photo taken from the person's facebook: https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=4500943403309387&set=a.502465661241738 Paladinum2 (talk) 02:10, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
copyrighted image, as seen in https://www.flickr.com/photos/lulaoficial/52083622282/in/album-72177720299064871/ Paladinum2 (talk) 02:32, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation. This photo is also on https://www.alpina.cc/index.php/geschichte.html (bottom left, you have to accept cookies). So I doubt whether this is "own work". No VRT ticket. JopkeB (talk) 02:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:25, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Disgusting. Not being used anywhere on WP except recently for trolling purposes and I can't imagine what other use case this would have. QuietHere (talk) 14:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- I apologise to whoever has to respond to this and hope you manage to be spared having to actually look at the image. Trust me, the file name is very literal and you don't need that in your life if you can avoid it. QuietHere (talk) 17:51, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Being "disgusting" is not by it self a reason for deletion, but the low res no EXIF photo is unlikely to be uploader's own work, and uploader's behavior shows they are here to troll not contribute. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:47, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- PS: Uploader already indef blocked on en:w; I have done likewise here. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:50, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Appears to be Flickr washing. Account has only this image, one follower. Image found [4] and others Ravensfire (talk) 17:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete under F1 and F6 - Flicker washing with original from FB [5] -- DaxServer (talk) 17:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per above. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:43, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Same again, no copyright information available on the website. Luke Hirst (talk) 20:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination by uploader. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:38, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Not able to find appropriate copyright information Luke Hirst (talk) 20:42, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination by uploader. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:38, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Wrong Pictures K.Mohanalingam (talk) 22:58, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per prompt uploader request. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:26, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Wrong Picture K.Mohanalingam (talk) 23:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per prompt uploader request. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:25, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Malenamoreno (talk · contribs)
[edit]
Out of project scope: self-promotion of non-notable Dj
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno - I respect.jpg
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno - Free Spirit.jpg
- File:DjProducer Wilman Moreno.jpg
George Chernilevsky talk 12:29, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 00:45, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Malenamoreno (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of project scope: self-promotion only, has been removed previously and uploaded by the user again
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno - Sencillo - Bad Girl.jpg
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno - Sencillo - Black Heart.jpg
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno - Album - In my world.jpg
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno - Álbum - Anarquia.jpg
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno -Sencillo- Techno Rock.jpg
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno - EP - Surreal.jpg
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno - Sencillo - Viking Warrior Scream.jpg
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno - En su Studio de Música.jpg
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno - Sencillo - Sassy Girl.jpg
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno -Sencillo - Sizzling Bay.jpg
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno - Sencillo - Do you wanna love me.jpg
- File:Dj-Wilman Moreno.jpg
George Chernilevsky talk 08:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 09:14, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Out of project scope: self-promotion of non-notable person George Chernilevsky talk 09:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 12:06, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Out of project scope: promotional only George Chernilevsky talk 09:56, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 12:06, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Out of project scope: promotional SPAM of non-notable company George Chernilevsky talk 10:40, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 12:06, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
I think the publication of such sensitive images is inappropriate. The man's slightly sideways view shows parts of his face. Personal protection! Lukas Beck (talk) 14:08, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Lukas Beck. Thank you for your inspiration. We decided together in the rooms of Wikipedia Hannover to upload this file. But I will upload a better one. Best regards, Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 10:36, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Bernd. It is good to know that there has been a debate about this. Nevertheless, it would be nice for all sides if the face could be made unrecognizable somehow.--Lukas Beck (talk) 12:46, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: by Túrelio. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 12:06, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Variety of promotional shots (eg. https://www.hancinema.net/korean_Ha_Da-in-picture_1063772.html) with no EXIF, claimed as own work.
- File:하다인.jpg (16).jpg
- File:하다인 (5).jpg
- File:하다인2.jpg
- File:하다인.jpg (7).jpg
- File:하다인.jpg (2).png
- File:하다인 (9).jpg
- File:하다인 (4).jpg
- File:하다인 (8).jpg
- File:하다인 (7).jpg
- File:하다인 (2).jpg
- File:하다인.jpg
- File:하다인 (3).jpg
Lord Belbury (talk) 15:06, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 12:06, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
out of scope, advertisement Bodhisattwa (talk) 06:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 17:53, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
File:Rachel Ndatulu Tugutu.jpg 2600:4041:4239:3000:39A7:7B6F:3160:23F8 18:12, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Delete: Permission missing. --Achim55 (talk) 18:30, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, l grant permission. 2600:4041:4239:3000:C0D7:D681:A4D:E5A1 21:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, l grant permission. Bleiomo (talk) 21:42, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- How do you own copyright to grant permission? -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Source link has clear copyright notice "© Snappr Inc. 2022, all rights reserved." Author listed as "Nicolus M.". Permission needs to be *from the copyright holder*. If they grant permission to share under free license, verify per COM:VRT, otherwise Delete -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; no permission. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Image not found at source, several hits at google search, not indicating free license. Lymantria (talk) 06:21, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- hello image source is here https://alisantekinler.com thank you for your interest. Jopalist (talk) 08:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete No proof of the license. --ToprakM ✉ 07:22, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 19:55, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Small photo without camera data, the uploader's only contribution. Uploader is globally locked due to long-term abuse. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 07:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 19:56, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mosijoon6606 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Noo proof of own work. All files have low quality and no metadata.
- File:Velayat Stadium in Semnan.jpg
- File:Naghshe Jahan stadium.jpg
- File:Ali daie stadium.jpg
- File:19mehr stadium.jpg
HeminKurdistan (talk) 08:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:00, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Watermark clearly states the copyrightholder. No proof of release under CC HeminKurdistan (talk) 07:59, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:01, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
No indication of release under CC HeminKurdistan (talk) 08:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:01, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mosijoon6606 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Noo proof of own work. All files have low quality and no metadata.
- File:Velayat Stadium in Semnan.jpg
- File:Naghshe Jahan stadium.jpg
- File:Ali daie stadium.jpg
- File:19mehr stadium.jpg
HeminKurdistan (talk) 08:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:00, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
And File:Ezgi Asaroglu - Aşk Kırmızı 2013 (cropped).jpg Copyvio. Nanahuatl (talk) 08:42, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: ARR - https://flickr.com/photos/canburak/8556307409/in/photolist-e36j6x-dKRS4S-tRTYVN-gy9mMM-dJumpD-gy8L6e-dJzJDs-k7ES6n-gbqnSq-dJzJXS-dZwvxr-dJzLVQ-dZwvhV-dJufZR-dJugpR-e36iQD-fQFB4Y-bmFKXK-gy897u-mW9RM9-bmFLUi-dSoAC7-mfwhTa-dZCeVy-bzbak8-dJDjqb-dJDj3N-7SxEVf-7SuoXD-7SxEME-dDrjcJ-7SuoPt-7SxG67-7SxF6S-7SxEA7-7SupEr-7SxLg1-7Suq94-7SxG1L-7SxEHS-7SuoDi-7Sup9V-7SupWi-7Suptv-e4rYGf-7SxFeS-7SxFBN-7SupSx-7SxFi7-7SupJH. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:04, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
- File:Mishka Bochkarev turkish wildfires-12.jpg
- File:Mishka Bochkarev turkish wildfires-4.jpg
- File:Mishka Bochkarev turkish wildfires-9.jpg
Copyvio. Nanahuatl (talk) 08:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination VRT needed. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:06, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Suspected copyright violation: file EXIF shows "Author Robert Hubner Copyright holder © 2022 Washington State University". VRT permission from Washington State University needed. MKFI (talk) 08:52, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:07, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
copied from internet : https://www.shareable.net/eight-ways-to-share-your-stuff-with-the-world/ Ske (talk) 08:53, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:08, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by TheAttackArchive (talk · contribs)
[edit]Images and artwork of a living artist. The uploader might be the artist himself, but VRT permission is needed to verify copyright.
- File:Peter santa maria.jpg
- File:Attack peter Daruma.jpg
- File:Godzilla Attack Peter Social On Sale Scale 1080x1080px 1024x1024.webp
- File:Peter Santa-Maria.jpg
- File:Takoro the last Dorok.jpg
MKFI (talk) 09:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:10, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Santoorplayer123 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Images have been taken https://www.drbipulray.com/ and https://www.drbipulray.com/bio which has no indication of a free license. The uploader might be the subject or authorized to upload these, but VRT permission is needed to verify copyright.
- File:Dr. Bipul Kumar Ray.jpg
- File:Album.jpg.webp
- File:Modi and Bipul.jpg.webp
- File:Prize.jpg.webp
- File:Logo.jpg.webp
MKFI (talk) 09:04, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:16, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
low quality misattributed copy of David Hume.jpg Poliocretes (talk) 09:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as a duplicate. Images like this can just be tagged with a {{Dupe}} template. --Lord Belbury (talk) 14:08, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:17, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
low quality misattributed version of Charles Montesquieu.jpg Poliocretes (talk) 09:30, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 20:18, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
pas dans le domaine public // José Cabrero Arnal est un dessinateur de bandes dessinées espagnol né le 6 septembre 1909 à Castilsabás (es) (Loporzano, province de Huesca) en Espagne et mort le 6 septembre 1982 à Antibes Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 07:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Hi !
- Newspapers are original intellectual creations and are therefore protected by copyright. They are also collective works. The duration of the economic rights is 70 years from the date of publication of the newspapers in France. As a result, the vast majority of the old press belongs to the public domain.
- Here is what the law says :
- Article L123-3 : For pseudonymous, anonymous or collective works, the duration of the exclusive right is seventy years from January 1st of the calendar year following that in which the work was published. The date of publication is determined by any mode of proof of common law, and in particular by legal deposit.
- Therefore this image is in the public domain in addition to the fact that it was published on Gallica. PierreConan (talk) 08:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Not a collective work since it is signed 'Arnal" by its (notorious) author. — Racconish 💬 18:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep It depends if the copyrighted work is the issue of the newspaper or the individual component, the cartoon. I tend to trust the lawyers for the Gallica program that released it into the public domain. --RAN (talk) 04:49, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The Gallica program does not release anything into the public domain and we have numerous examples of files coming from Gallica where they were described as public domain because they were coming from an old newspaper which have been deleted on Commons because they were the work of a person dead less than 70 years ago. — Racconish 💬 06:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: not in the public domain, undelete in 2053. --Strakhov (talk) 22:15, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Can't find the appropriate copyright license. So I'd rather it be deleted and not reuploaded. Luke Hirst (talk) 20:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 12:51, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
Unable to find appropriate copyright. Luke Hirst (talk) 20:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Yann at 11:55, 6 October 2022 UTC: as per COM:SPEEDY. --Krdbot 19:51, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Unable to find copyright. And it says under the UK Copyright law that most logos are NOT OK for the commons Luke Hirst (talk) 20:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Yann at 11:55, 6 October 2022 UTC: as per COM:SPEEDY. --Krdbot 19:51, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Same as the other files. Not able to find appropriate copyright Luke Hirst (talk) 20:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Yann at 11:55, 6 October 2022 UTC: as per COM:SPEEDY. --Krdbot 19:51, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Album cover CoffeeEngineer (talk) 19:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:50, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Personal file, not used anywhere Comrade Mmirg (talk) 20:24, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:49, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Unable to find the correct copyright information for this file. And I'm uncertain about when this was made. Luke Hirst (talk) 20:38, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- I think it is extremely unlikely that the seal is copyrighted. Generally things like this are not copyrighted by state or local governments in the US. Bubba73 (talk) 02:51, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- I've emailed the county to see if I can find out anything about it. 2601:341:4202:1EB0:8DAC:689:4549:E161 06:44, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: already speedy deleted. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:48, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation. This is a poster of a tv series of 2021 (Indonesia), so less than 50 years as is required by copyright rules in Indonesia. Image is on many websites, for instance on https://www.imdb.com/title/tt16579002/ So I doubt whether this is "own work". JopkeB (talk) 03:10, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 17:09, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Why should this document be on Commons? I think Out of scope, perhaps personal document. No proper description (I added a very short English translation). Moreover: I doubt whether it is own work, because it is from a (semi?) government agency. No idea wheter it is in the Public Domain or has another correct licence for Commons. JopkeB (talk) 02:59, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 03:08, 14 October 2022 UTC: per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Nemanjab1111 --Krdbot 07:47, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
Closed discussions from Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:1
|
|---|
|
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Copyvio + is that literally a photo of a screen? Dronebogus (talk) 02:44, 4 March 2022 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --Amada44 talk to me 15:27, 14 March 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
OOS garbage
Dronebogus (talk) 12:50, 26 March 2022 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 13:28, 26 March 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Out of scope garbage Dronebogus (talk) 21:15, 2 April 2022 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 10:33, 3 April 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Out of scope junk
Dronebogus (talk) 00:08, 30 April 2022 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:09, 30 April 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Out of scope
Dronebogus (talk) 12:17, 6 May 2022 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 13:07, 6 May 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
OOS junk files Dronebogus (talk) 12:07, 10 May 2022 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 13:56, 10 May 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
OOS garbage
Dronebogus (talk) 20:08, 12 May 2022 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 10:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
More OOS junk
Dronebogus (talk) 16:30, 15 May 2022 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 10:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
OOS garbage Dronebogus (talk) 06:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC) Out of scope junk Dronebogus (talk) 22:07, 20 May 2022 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 07:10, 21 May 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
OOS crap junk Dronebogus (talk) 04:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
No copyright info + OOS Dronebogus (talk) 05:18, 10 June 2022 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. Yann (talk) 11:50, 11 June 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Deleted I'm closing this since the files were already deleted. Feel free to revert if there's a reason the discussion should still be open. --Adamant1 (talk) 23:57, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
Load of OOS crap This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
More OOS crap Dronebogus (talk) 05:54, 23 June 2022 (UTC) Deleted I'm closing this since the files were already deleted. Feel free to revert me if there's a reason the discussion should still be open. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:00, 2 July 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Oos garbage Dronebogus (talk) 15:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC) Deleted I'm closing this since the files were already deleted. Feel free to revert if there's a reason the discussion should still be open. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:01, 2 July 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
OOS garbage Dronebogus (talk) 20:27, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:12, 9 July 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
OOS garbage Dronebogus (talk) 13:56, 2 July 2022 (UTC) Deleted --Adamant1 (talk) 05:34, 3 July 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
That was fast. More junk as usual Dronebogus (talk) 01:32, 4 July 2022 (UTC) Deleted The images were deleted. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:08, 5 July 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
OOS garbage
Dronebogus (talk) 18:23, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted per nomination. --Yann (talk) 09:50, 26 September 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
OOS garbage Dronebogus (talk) 20:49, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:23, 28 September 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
OOS garbage
Dronebogus (talk) 14:46, 7 October 2022 (UTC) Deleted: per nom, some apparent copyviols from social media. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:58, 7 October 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Out of scope crap Dronebogus (talk) 05:30, 15 October 2022 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:44, 15 October 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Garbagé de OOS Dronebogus (talk) 11:06, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 20:03, 18 October 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
OOS garbage Dronebogus (talk) 11:58, 20 October 2022 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:09, 20 October 2022 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
OOS garbage Dronebogus (talk) 18:24, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:41, 2 November 2022 (UTC) |
Files in Category:1
[edit]Instagram crap
Dronebogus (talk) 11:05, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 11:49, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:1
[edit]Usual collection of Instagram crap
Dronebogus (talk) 01:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 13:23, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:1
[edit]Oos garbage
Dronebogus (talk) 22:35, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 19:40, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:1
[edit]Usual oos crap
Dronebogus (talk) 12:41, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Derivative work of logo. Source country is unknown, so we cannot be sure in freedom of panorama. Taivo (talk) 11:05, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:34, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:1
[edit]Personal spam and potential copyright violations
- File:Azmy Ehab21.jpg
- File:BALSA EUCLIDES.webp
- File:JARDIM BALNEARIO EUCLIDES.webp
- File:MAPA EUCLIDES.webp
- File:Moatazelmasry1632004.jpg
Dronebogus (talk) 01:57, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:37, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
I am unable to find the license at the source given. DrKay (talk) 20:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- According to The Royal Family, the file belongs to Crown Copyright, and according to Copyright Licensing Agency, Crown Copyright is a publicly publish file. 赤羽蒼玄 (talk) 07:46, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: The source added describes the Royal Family's page and the explanation of Crown Copyright in the CLA, but the original photograph's source (Twitter) doesn't have any evidence that this photograph is alvailable under the OGL3, which is essential for keep this file. 83.61.243.178 11:55, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- The Royal Family is the official Twitter of the royal.uk website, so the relevant specifications of the website also extend to this Twitter, and according to Your Rights and Grant of Rights in the Content in Twitter's Terms of Service, Twitter users allow Twitter and other users to post relevant content after "By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services".[6] 赤羽蒼玄 (talk) 16:36, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: It's only for Twitter. All contets: What’s yours is yours — you own your Content, but Twitter can use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute. 83.61.243.178 19:08, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- This still cannot deny that the two websites are under the same standard management. 赤羽蒼玄 (talk) 19:36, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Neither of both pages gives a clear notice/post that this file in question can be used freely —an example post with free license, for Twitter's case, can be seen here—. Unless evidence corroboring otherwise, this file should be considered a copyright violation and deleted under the precautionary principle's rule. 83.61.243.178 20:10, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
- This still cannot deny that the two websites are under the same standard management. 赤羽蒼玄 (talk) 19:36, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
- The Royal Family is the official Twitter of the royal.uk website, so the relevant specifications of the website also extend to this Twitter, and according to Your Rights and Grant of Rights in the Content in Twitter's Terms of Service, Twitter users allow Twitter and other users to post relevant content after "By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services".[6] 赤羽蒼玄 (talk) 16:36, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --shizhao (talk) 01:56, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 12:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 19:54, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 12:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 19:54, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 12:31, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 19:54, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Lebanon A1Cafel (talk) 12:32, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:08, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 12:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:09, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
File:Poster displayed at a stall of Unnayan Mela 2018 at Comilla Town Hall 13 January, 2018.jpg
[edit]COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 12:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:09, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 12:38, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:09, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 12:38, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:09, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 12:40, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:09, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
Uploaded as own work, but image appears online in several sources DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:45, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Uploaded as own work, but image appears online in several sources DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:46, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
Licensed only under the GFDL, which is no longer allowed on Commons. HouseBlaster (talk) 01:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- It's a 2D scan so either it is PD as {{PD-Art}} or it should never had been uploaded to Commons even under GFDL.
- If the work is anonnymous, it should be PD (I'm not familiar with Polish) PierreSelim (talk) 06:24, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Kept: PD-Poland. --Yann (talk) 15:43, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
copyright infringement or quoting without permission from the following sources: https://www.celebes.co/papua/tempat-wisata-mimika Oloyobuen (talk) 01:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:44, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Copyright infringement or quoting without permission from the following sources: https://www.victorynews.id/olahraga/pr-3314245582/pemkab-lembata-sulap-lapangan-polres-lembata-jadi-lapangan-pendukung-etmc-xxxi-tahun-2022 Oloyobuen (talk) 01:15, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:45, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Copyright infringement or quoting without permission from the following sources: https://www.tokopedia.com/blog/travel-objek-wisata-di-nabire/ Oloyobuen (talk) 01:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:45, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation? This photo is on https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Kochi/new-command-medical-officer-takes-charge/article33720755.ece. It might indeed be originally from the Indian Navy, but there is no proof of that. We need a VRT ticket. (Anybody can make an account with the name "navalhistorydivision".) Perhaps this is also true for other photos on w:en:List of serving admirals of the Indian Navy. JopkeB (talk) 02:12, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, the 'own work' claim is unreliable. See Commons:Deletion requests/Uploads by User:Navalhistorydivision. Verbcatcher (talk) 05:08, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:46, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation? This photo is on https://cdm.telangana.nic.in/index.php/2-uncategorised/12-commandant-homepage-article and many other websites. It might indeed be originally from the Indian Navy, but there is no proof of that. We need a VRT ticket. (Anybody can make an account with the name "navalhistorydivision".) Might also be the case for other uploads by /Navalhistorydivision. JopkeB (talk) 03:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, the 'own work' claim is unreliable. See Commons:Deletion requests/Uploads by User:Navalhistorydivision. Verbcatcher (talk) 05:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Uploaded as own work, but image appears online in several sources DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:02, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Duplicate: File:Emblem of Chihayaakasaka, Osaka.svg Xeror (talk) 06:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Not own work. [7] page16. Kareyac (talk) 06:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:50, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
ce n'est pas un "travail personnel" ; scan de la couverture d'un livre, pas dans le domaine public Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 07:33, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, this photograph is in the public domain because it was made by me, and the cover is available for free on Google Books PierreConan (talk) 08:19, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Google Books is no proof because it provides selected excerpts and because it is an American site invoking "fair use", but Commons does not tolerate "fair use".--Eunostos (talk) 18:14, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:50, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
File:L'abbé Antoine Dumas photographié au Château de Goutelas à Marcoux le 3 décembre 1963.jpg
[edit]pas dans le domaine public Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 07:36, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, this image has been digitized on the Saint-Etienne municipal archives website because it is part of a donation from the author who has authorized sharing under the conditions CC-by-SA-4.0. PierreConan (talk) 08:18, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- There's no mention of this license here: https://archives.saint-etienne.fr/expositions-et-publications-1/albums-photos/les-albums-de-leon
- Do you have a source or can you get a written (even electronic) confirmation and send it to Commons:Volunteer Response Team? The RedBurn (talk) 07:53, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
- Why is there no display of the license on the page? The website says "Pursuant to the law of March 11, 1957 (art. 41) and the intellectual property code of July 1, 1992, any partial or total reproduction for collective use is strictly prohibited without authorization from the City of Saint-Étienne." which appears to state the opposite of your argument. --RAN (talk) 04:55, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:51, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Not a good version Alloyblue (talk) 08:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:51, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Not a good version Alloyblue (talk) 08:24, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- There don't seem to be any other versions of this. See the category Greater Republic of Central America| that it's now in. Philh-591 (talk) 21:45, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Kept: In use. --Yann (talk) 15:52, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
no permission copyrighted logo Hoyanova (talk) 09:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo, in use. --Yann (talk) 15:52, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Doublon. 2A02:A03F:C714:A300:8CA1:81EF:2553:B4AD 11:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 15:54, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
it was uploaded in 2015 to ru.wiki as a fair-use file with the source defined as http://spiritualsciencemuseum.org/19th-18th-century/12-19th-18th-century-masters/411-hyobong-hangnul (not available now). But still it prevents us from thinking that it is a real self-made file rubin16 (talk) 11:23, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep PD-South Korea and PD-1996 would be the correct license.
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 15:54, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
poor quality, no recognisable subject Ske (talk) 11:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:54, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Clearly displays a painting by somebody who presumably is not the person who's claiming that the photo is their "own work" Hoary (talk) 12:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:54, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Poster published in 1978 is still copyrighted A1Cafel (talk) 12:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:55, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
The original image is from Google Earth VR. It does not have a CC-BY-SA license and is not in public domain. Py4nf (talk) 12:36, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:55, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:58, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: One kept, in use. --Yann (talk) 15:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded this file, thinking it was a clean photograph of the original; however it was apparently a modified image/restored painting. Since then, I have seen other photos of the original, which show no sign of restoration. The restoration would have taken significant time and required artistic judgement; it isn't a simple reproduction of an old painting. I don't know if the restored/repaired version meets public domain status and have opted for deletion.
For comparison, I recently uploaded File:European in Japan playing viol.jpg which shows the image unrestored and which is in the public domain based on its age.
I am seeing another File:Japanese woman playing the lute.jpg which also looks restored. Jacqke (talk) 01:14, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
-
image up for deletion, apparently a modified or restored image (restoration needs to be 50 years ago to be public domain) -
Image apparently modified or restored (restoration needs to be 50 years ago to be public domain) -
Unrestored or repaired, public domain in Japan based on age
_கோவில்_A-9_கண்டிவீதி_பக்கமான_தோற்றம்.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![156 File:Installation of a 105-mm cannon into a light German self-propelled artillery installation "Vespe" (Sd.Kfz.124 Wespe) using a tractor-crane Sd.Kfz.9 1. (50922150552).jpg](#File:Installation_of_a_105-mm_cannon_into_a_light_German_self-propelled_artillery_installation_"Vespe"_(Sd.Kfz.124_Wespe)_using_a_tractor-crane_Sd.Kfz.9_1._(50922150552).jpg){kind=link}
-Affiche_sur_Brian_Murray,_sportif_professionnel,_dir._général_et_entraîneur-2022-09-25.jpg){kind=link}
-Affiche_d'accueil_de_l'expo-2022-09-25.jpg){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}
_%E0%AE%95%E0%AF%8B%E0%AE%B5%E0%AE%BF%E0%AE%B2%E0%AF%8D_A-9_%E0%AE%95%E0%AE%A3%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%9F%E0%AE%BF%E0%AE%B5%E0%AF%80%E0%AE%A4%E0%AE%BF_%E0%AE%AA%E0%AE%95%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%95%E0%AE%AE%E0%AE%BE%E0%AE%A9_%E0%AE%A4%E0%AF%8B%E0%AE%B1%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%B1%E0%AE%AE%E0%AF%8D.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_%E0%AE%95%E0%AF%8B%E0%AE%B5%E0%AE%BF%E0%AE%B2%E0%AF%8D_A-9_%E0%AE%95%E0%AE%A3%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%9F%E0%AE%BF%E0%AE%B5%E0%AF%80%E0%AE%A4%E0%AE%BF_%E0%AE%AA%E0%AE%95%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%95%E0%AE%AE%E0%AE%BE%E0%AE%A9_%E0%AE%A4%E0%AF%8B%E0%AE%B1%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%B1%E0%AE%AE%E0%AF%8D.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2.webp&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_3.webp&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.webp&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.webp&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.webp&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_posted_on_Instagram_CPvlHbYFa7t(JPG).jpg&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){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}
Kept: PD-Art. --Yann (talk) 15:58, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
I can find the image online in several places [8] and [9], description says painting is by Steven Jobs but then uses uploader name as author. This is questionable. Ravensfire (talk) 15:51, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:58, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Surement pas un travail personnel car la photo vient de https://www.ensonhaber.com/biyografi/hiram-abas-kimdir Bertrand Labévue (talk) 15:59, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:58, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The file includes a logo with complex design which is not eligible to copyright protection SanctumRosarium (talk) 16:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:59, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Bandera de Chuquisaca y Sucre.svg Janitoalevic (talk) 17:45, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:59, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Bandera de Sucre (hasta 2020).svg Janitoalevic (talk) 17:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Closed as duplicate; see below. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
File:Bandera de Sucre (hasta 2020).svg. Janitoalevic (talk) 18:06, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:59, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Fereydan lokal guide (talk · contribs)
[edit]The source does not tag these pictures with a free license
- File:Parvis-2.jpg
- File:The main playing field.jpg
- File:Salle annexe.jpg
- File:۲۰۲۰۰۳۲۲ ۱۰۱۳۰۳-169x300.jpg
HeminKurdistan (talk) 17:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:00, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
I see no basis of notability for this person. No Wikipedia article, nothing online, no independent media or even his own suggesting he is a "writer and comedian." Keystone18 (talk) 18:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
File:Mohajer-6 UAV and its ground communication and control system that can be used jointly for the Mohajer 6, Ababil 3 and Sadeq UAVs. It has 500 km range in new models..jpg
[edit]
Not own work but stolen from https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2021/08/iranian-mohajer-6-drones-spotted-in.html Streamline8988 (talk) 18:18, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- This photo was taken by Iranian operators (and republished by me as the owner).
- And if you had paid more attention to the website you mentioned above, they didn't mention the photographer and the owner of the photo and the copyrights of it and they have no claim on its ownership, because their work on the website you mentioned were illegal at that time to publish it without consent.
- (probably took it from one of mine or my friends' accounts in Iranian social medias)
- Therefore I request that this deletion process be terminated. Thank you Mr Streamline8988
- Alireza numberone (talk) 18:19, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Alireza numberone If you are owner of this picture, please upload a high-quality version of this file (144 kilobytes is not much) with metadata. This is a good proof that that you are the copyright owner. HeminKurdistan (talk) 20:36, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Streamline8988, I explained that the website you claimed, published the photo illegally without mentioning the source. This photo is old and because I had to shared it on different social medias, reduced the quality. If there is any claim, please tell me, otherwise I don't think there is anything left to say.
- I think The purpose of nomination is to investigate copyright infringement and I have shown that the claim of copyright infringement here is wrong.
- Alireza numberone (talk) 00:10, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Alireza numberone If you are owner of this picture, please upload a high-quality version of this file (144 kilobytes is not much) with metadata. This is a good proof that that you are the copyright owner. HeminKurdistan (talk) 20:36, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
Keep I believe the uploader. I couldn't find the full-size photo with a credible watermark (such as IRNA, ISNA, IMA Media, etc) so he well could have taken it. I take back the deletion request. Streamline8988 (talk) 00:30, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 16:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
File:Installation of a 105-mm cannon into a light German self-propelled artillery installation "Vespe" (Sd.Kfz.124 Wespe) using a tractor-crane Sd.Kfz.9 1. (50922150552).jpg
[edit]_using_a_tractor-crane_Sd.Kfz.9_1._(50922150552).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_using_a_tractor-crane_Sd.Kfz.9_1._(50922150552).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
the flickr user "tormentor4555" is obviously not the photographer of this image. Thus, he cannot publish this image under a free license on the internet. More information is needed. Mosbatho (talk) 20:19, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:02, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
File:Shawville (Québec)-Affiche sur Brian Murray, sportif professionnel, dir. général et entraîneur-2022-09-25.jpg
[edit]-Affiche_sur_Brian_Murray,_sportif_professionnel,_dir._g%C3%A9n%C3%A9ral_et_entra%C3%AEneur-2022-09-25.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
-Affiche_sur_Brian_Murray,_sportif_professionnel,_dir._g%C3%A9n%C3%A9ral_et_entra%C3%AEneur-2022-09-25.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Photo of apparently non-free work. -- Asclepias (talk) 20:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Bryan Murray (born 1942 in Shawville, Quebec, Canada) was a professional hockey player, instructor and club general manager. He worked for the Washington Capitals from 1981 to 1990; for the Detroit Red Wings, from 1990 to 1993; for the Florida Panthers in 1997-98; for the Anaheim Mighty Ducks, in 2001-2002; for the Ottawa Senators, from 2005 to 2008. This photo on Wikicommons shows public support for this great hockey player, a native of Shawville. This sign is installed at the entrance to the fair grounds in Shawville, where Brian Murray is from. Recommendation: keep the photo. -- Veillg1 (Veillg1) 03:20, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:03, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
-Affiche_d%27accueil_de_l%27expo-2022-09-25.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
-Affiche_d%27accueil_de_l%27expo-2022-09-25.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Photo of apparently non-free work. -- Asclepias (talk) 20:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
-Affiche_d'accueil_de_l'expo-2022-09-25.jpg){kind=link}
This photo seems very useful to me because it is the symbol of this annual agricultural exhibition of Shawville.-- Veillg1 03:15, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
-Affiche_d'accueil_de_l'expo-2022-09-25.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:03, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
-Affiche_d'accueil_de_l'expo-2022-09-25.jpg){kind=link}
Author died in 1996, only the works made during the war by this author could be PD-UK-Gov. Others are protected for 70 years after author's death, it will be PD in the home country in 2067. 83.61.243.178 20:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Note that in the Royal Collection is a clear copyright notice which says "Royal Collection Trust/All Rights Reserved". 83.61.243.178 20:40, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:03, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: The source cites a copyright from a private collection CoffeeEngineer (talk) 22:28, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete unless evidence of free license is shown. Tagged as PD as author died more than 70 years ago, but author is listed as unknown; photo date given as 1946. No reason to assume that the unknown photographer must have died within 6 years of taking the photo. -- 19:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:04, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Because it's my property and I want it deleted from the wikimedia and all the wikipedia pages it has been used Rumbelsperger (talk) 22:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment In use and uploaded 7 years ago, when you agreed to a perpetual Creative Commons license. Please give us a reason to delete. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:16, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- I was a teenager at the time and barely understood the terms for wikipedia usage. Nowadays, I'm a grown man and know better. I don't want to see it used anymore in wikipedia for the time being. Seven years ago I was 15 years old. Not an age to decide such perpetual things. Rumbelsperger (talk) 00:24, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep unless some reason it needs to be deleted is shown. Shared by uploader under irrevocable free license back in 2015. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:27, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- I was a teenager at the time and barely understood the terms for wikipedia usage. Nowadays, I'm a grown man and know better. I don't want to see it used anymore in wikipedia for the time being. Seven years ago I was 15 years old. Not an age to decide such perpetual things. Rumbelsperger (talk) 00:25, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
- I'm sympathetic. I will defer to the judgment of an admin. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:36, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: PD-Art. --Yann (talk) 16:04, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Eu publiquei este arquivo na wikipedia quando eu tinha 15 anos de idade. Naquela época, eu não entendia as regras da wikipedia. Eu acreditava que a wikipedia era um local onde você podia excluir e adicionar arquivos ao seu bel-prazer. Hoje eu tenho 23 anos e sei que não gostaria de ter publicado essas fotos, que pertencem ao acervo pessoal da minha família. São meus parentes e não gostaria dessas fotos aqui mais. Eu com 15 anos nem tinha percebido a existencia de uma suposta regra onde um arquivo adicionado aqui necessita de permissão de um administrador. Então venho aqui novamente pedir para que este arquivo venha a ser deletado pois eu cometi um erro com 15 anos de idade, um adolescente. E hoje, com 23 anos, entendo que não teria adicionado este arquivo à wikipedia. Peço perdão pelo meu erro e venho aqui novamente pedir para retirar este arquivo pessoal MEU da wikipedia, da wiki commons e de qualquer outro local público desta plataforma. Agradeço a atenção e compreensão de todos. Rumbelsperger (talk) 22:41, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I appreciate your saying you were a minor when you uploaded it. Were that the only part of the story, I might favor deletion. However: 1)19th century photo is out of copyright, public domain. 2)File is in use in article space, showing it is within project scope. Really, I don't see why you would think this is a problem, thanks. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 02:52, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Because they are pictures of my relatives, my ancestors. If I knew the wikipedia rules at the time, I wouldn't have uploaded the file. I'm feeling my privacy being invaded by people looking at the picture of my ancestors that only were in my private collection until I was stupid enough to put them on public Rumbelsperger (talk) 22:48, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment This has already been resolved in a previous deletion request. I don't see the point in rehashing it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:17, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep for the same reasons Infrogmation spelled out. I'm sympathetic that you didn't realize CC licenses are irrevocable but it's a historical photograph that is educationally useful. Thank you for your contribution. Abzeronow (talk) 17:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- I regret doing that contribution. Those pictures belong in my private collection and I want to keep them that way. They are members of my family, they are not public people. As I said in a previous comment, If I knew I had to go through so much trouble to remove them, I wouldn't have uploaded them in the first place. Please, understand, it's not just a historical photograph, it's my family. Even though they are long deceased, it's still my family. And I don't want my private stuff in public. Rumbelsperger (talk) 22:52, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion - Do not make this request again -- you will be blocked from editing here. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:30, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 185.172.241.184 as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: copyvio. Needs discussion whether this is over COM:TOO#UK Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:51, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
not public domain Droit de retrait 03 (talk) 14:21, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, the uploader has not shown why the country of origin for the photo is Italy, or why the photo qualifies as a "simple photograph". — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:07, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Public domain in Italy. Photograph taken by Angelo Cozzi from Mondadori. - Groupir ! (talk) 15:28, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Groupir !: So he's a professional photographer. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: Yes, a professional photographer who made a simple photograph. - Groupir ! (talk) 23:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Groupir !: So he's a professional photographer. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I agree, simple photograph, no elaborate staging or costumes, or props. --RAN (talk) 04:51, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Simple photograph per RAN. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:14, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Matr4x-404 as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: This probably meets the threshold of originality. This is because WPS is based in China, and the threshold of originality in China is pretty low (according to Commons:Threshold_of_originality). I think this deserves discussion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:15, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete I think that this should be deleted for the afforementioned reason. Matr4x-404 (talk) 18:28, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and COM:TOO China. --Wcam (talk) 20:23, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I have realized that this logo might have been made in Hong Kong or Singapore (see File:WPS-logo.svg). This does not impact this deletion request, as the threshold of originality in both of those countries is similarly low to China.
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:14, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
The logo is very likely proprietary, and the license is fake. The article about this festival has been removed from the ru-wiki Khinkali (talk) 13:45, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 18:23, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 20:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I'm not sure. Search results in several languages, but I don't know how notable they are. I'd lean toward keeping but it's to the discretion of an admin. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:40, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Agree that this is a borderline case. This is low resolution with a lack of EXIF data though, so delete per COM:PRP. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:49, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
The file is a derivative work of Porisontti (Wikidata:Q114245074), a 2022 work of light and sound art by the SWart art collective and Tapani Rinne (b. Wikidata:Q7684447), located in Pori, Finland. The authors of the original work (the sculpture) are still living, so it is still under copyright and thus not in public domain. Freedom of panorama is for buildings only in Finland. Apalsola t • c 12:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Poistopyyntö hyväksytty, kuvan voi poistaa. Jos poisto pitää tehdä itse tarvitsen siihen ohjeet. 194.89.239.222 08:00, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- Poistopyyntö hyväksytty, kuvan voi poistaa. Jos poisto pitää tehdä itse tarvitsen siihen ohjeet. Katinkanen (talk) 08:01, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 16:32, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Nick-D as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Copyright violation: the uploader is not the copyright holder of this Belize government image as claimed — billinghurst sDrewth 01:20, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per my statement above @Billinghurst: I'm curious at why you think that the criteria for speedy deletion weren't met here given that the uploader is obviously not the copyright owner as claimed. Nick-D (talk) 02:05, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- One of the files was 2018, so it is simply better to put before the community when you did not support the deletion with any evidence. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:23, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- They are obviously Belize government images, so there is no likelihood that the copyright is owned by the uploader as claimed. Nick-D (talk) 00:16, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
- One of the files was 2018, so it is simply better to put before the community when you did not support the deletion with any evidence. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:23, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:05, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 185.172.241.184 as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: copyvio. I'm not sure of that - this version is not the one previously deleted, and appears to have been created by the uploader based on the official description. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Although I can't see the file that was deleted by Infrogmation of New Orleans back in April , my guess is that it might be the same as en:File:Flag of the Belize Defence Force.svg uploaded locally to English Wikipedia as non-free content. That local non-free file was also uploaded by Skjoldbro; so, I'm guessing they created one this Commons version to be similar to the non-free one, but not identical. Using the same file name for both files probably wasn't wise because the English Wikipedia software will always use the local file even when the Commons file is supposed to be used instead, but the files aren't identical. The question is whether they are different enough so that the copyright of the original flag imagery doesn't need to be considered. The COM:COA#Public domain definition (blazon) (i.e. the written definition) of a coat of arms is not generally considered to be independently subject to copyright protection on its own; so, this means anyone can pretty much freely create their own visual representation of a coat of arms by simply following its blazon. It's the individual representations that are typically considered to be eligible for copyright, but these individual representation might still be considered COM:DW if they too closely resemble the original work they're based upon. If we assume the same logic applies to flag images (which Commons seems to do per COM:CB#Flags), then the hard part seems tp be determining whether the recreated version is based entirely on the "blazon" for the flag or whether it was a reproduction based on the actual flag used by the Belize Defense Force. One way to determine this could be to show that an official definition of the flag was provided by the Belize Defence Force or Government of Belize, and then that the Commons version was based on that definition. Otherwise, simply using the original flag as a visual reference to create a different version of it could be considered a DW at best, and a copyvio at worst. The tree, axe and gun elements are of a concern since they appear to be non-geometric shapes that may be eligible for copyright protection on their own and also when combined together. If the Commons version was an attempt to recreate the imagery of the original flag as "precisely as possible", then copyright of the original flag may still need to be taken into account even if the recreation isn't eligible for copyright protection on its own. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm going to simplify this for myself: there is insufficient information here to make a plausible assertion of compatible licensing, so it should go per COM:PRP. It's possible the right legal lens could end up concluding this is compatibly licensed, but based on the information actually present and inferable without too great leaps it seems less likely. --Xover (talk) 13:29, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. The file is a derivative of the copyrigted version (original flag) shown on English Wikipedia and can therefore not be published with a free license on Commons. --Ellywa (talk) 07:02, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Uploads by User:Navalhistorydivision
[edit]- File:Admiral R Hari Kumar, CNS.jpg
- File:25th CNS Portrait - No 2 (8x10).jpg - On Indian Navy website,[10] where there is no free license.[11]
- File:VAdm V Srinivas IGNS Navy.jpg
- File:Surg RAdm Anupam kapur, CO Asvini.jpg
- File:FOGNA- RAdm Manish Chadha.jpg
- File:Foga display 1 copy.jpg
- File:Sadhu11.jpg
- File:Anupam123.jpg - published in a tweet and a news report, both dated before the upload to Commons.[12][13]
- File:Images.DK Goswami.jpg
- File:Index Karwar.jpg
- File:Pix (2) 13.jpg
- File:FOTNA.jpg
- File:Pix 1 82.jpg - published in a Tweet before upload to Commons.[14]
- File:Rear-Admiral-Sandeep-Mehta-e1639664301409.jpg - published in a news report dated before the upload to Commons.[15]
- File:Rajesh-Dhankhar-e1622553558708.webp - published in a news report dated before the upload to Commons.[16]
- File:JS(Navy DefenceStaff)3SRF.jpg
- File:Vice Adm Sreekumar Nair DGNP.jpg - published in a news report dated before the upload to Commons.[17]
- File:Rahul Vilas Gokhale.jpg] - published in a news report dated before the upload to Commons.[18]
- File:Rajesh-Dhankar.jpg - published in a news report dated before the upload to Commons, in the same squashed format.[19]
- File:RADM DS GUJRAL-NM.jpg - published in a news report dated before the upload to Commons.[20]
- File:RAdm Antony George.jpg - published in a news report dated before the upload to Commons.[21]
- File:Surg VAdm Sheila Samanta Mathai, NM, VSM.jpg - published in a webpage for a conference that was held before the upload to Commons.[22]
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_13.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
3SRF.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Risk of copyright violation, the uploader's claim to be the author of these files is unreliable. These are photographs of senior Indian Navy officers, most of which look like official portraits. They are mostly low resolution, and several do not have metadata. Several have been published before they were uploaded to Commons.
See also the other deletion nominations for files from this uploader:
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:01ki-Admiraljpg1.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Comdt-main-photo.jpg
-- Verbcatcher (talk) 04:56, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all per nom, absent specific evidence that an individual image is public domain or compatibly licensed. --Xover (talk) 11:50, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellywa (talk) 20:45, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Invalid public domain claim, no indication on public domain on the source website. Verbcatcher (talk) 01:59, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Here's a statement from the website "Feel free to use our images for commercial or for personal purpose. Keep watching this place for more updated images and happening events in Goa. You can also browse through our categories to find many more beautiful photos of Goa." which can be found on the homepage [23]. Also the site has no copyrights released. If in the worst case, better to take a relicensing method than delete. Rejoy2003 04:59, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- I had not noticed the 'Feel free to use our images' notice on the website. This does not justify your public domain claim. I am dubious whether this statement meets the requirements for an explicit free license as specified in Commons:Licensing. We require that a copyright tag is included in the file page, and it is unclear which if any is applicable. Also, the website does not indicate the source of its images, and I can't see a claim that all the photographs were taken by the operators of the website. Verbcatcher (talk) 05:54, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Relicense it to any appropriate compatible license. I don't see a reason to doubt such files that are released to use publicly. I'll leave this to the admins — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rejoy2003 (talk • contribs) 09:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Commons:Licensing gives the material may be used freely by anyone as an example of an insufficient licence. There is no Commons licence template for that. The goanphotos.com website would have to change its copyright notice, or provide permission by email, for Commons to be able to accept its images. --Lord Belbury (talk) 13:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- They don't have an e-mail or anything to contact though. So going through the VRT process seems unlikely. Hence relicense it under free licence tag. Rejoy2003 21:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Commons:Licensing gives the material may be used freely by anyone as an example of an insufficient licence. There is no Commons licence template for that. The goanphotos.com website would have to change its copyright notice, or provide permission by email, for Commons to be able to accept its images. --Lord Belbury (talk) 13:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Relicense it to any appropriate compatible license. I don't see a reason to doubt such files that are released to use publicly. I'll leave this to the admins — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rejoy2003 (talk • contribs) 09:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- I had not noticed the 'Feel free to use our images' notice on the website. This does not justify your public domain claim. I am dubious whether this statement meets the requirements for an explicit free license as specified in Commons:Licensing. We require that a copyright tag is included in the file page, and it is unclear which if any is applicable. Also, the website does not indicate the source of its images, and I can't see a claim that all the photographs were taken by the operators of the website. Verbcatcher (talk) 05:54, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. No plausible indication of a compatible license. --Xover (talk) 12:15, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and discussion. Re:Rejoy2003 we cannot relicense a photo. This can only lawfully be done by the owner of the copyright, in most cases this is the photographer. --Ellywa (talk) 20:49, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
File:Parade of the Wooden Soldiers - Concert Band - United States Air Force Band of Mid-America.mp3
[edit]This is NOT Leon Jessel's' The Parade of the Tin [Wooden] Soldiers. This is a bizarre medley of music that happens to contain some snippets of Jessel's piece. Softlavender (talk) 04:56, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
For a comparison, here is a recording of the Jessel work in question: [24]. Softlavender (talk) 04:57, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. File is in use. IronGargoyle (talk) 22:16, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. It appears to be a genuine performance by the "United States Air Force Band of Mid-America, Concert Band". That it is a random medley rather than a straightforward performance of The Parade … suggests deWP and itWP should probably replace it, but it's still in scope for Commons. --Xover (talk) 13:20, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, per discussion. In addition, the work of Jessel is in PD. --Ellywa (talk) 20:56, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Photographs from the Goa Legislative Assembly Website uploaded by User:Rejoy2003
[edit]- File:Shri-subhash-a-shirodkar.jpg
- File:Shri-ravi-s-naik.jpg
- File:Shri-govind-gaude.jpg
- File:Shri-vishwajit-pratapsingh-rane.jpg
- File:Smt-deviya-rane.jpg
- File:Shri-premendra-shet.jpg
- File:Shri-rajesh-faldessai.jpg
- File:Shri-viresh-borkar.jpg
- File:Shri-rodolfo-fernandes.jpg
- File:Shri-atanasio-j-monserrate.jpg
- File:Shri-shrikedar-naik.jpg
- File:Niklant.jpg
- File:Shri-shrichandrakant-shetye.jpg
- File:Smt-delilah-lobo.jpg
- File:Shri-shripravin-arlekar.jpg
- File:A. K. S. Usgaonkar.jpg
- File:Chandrakant Kavlekar.jpg
- File:Prakash-Velip.jpg
- File:Avertano-Furtado.jpg
- File:Luizinho Faleiro.jpg
- File:Shri-sankalp-amonkar.jpg
- File:Shri-yuri-alemao.jpg
- File:Clafasio Dias.jpg
- File:47 pic Subhash-Naik.jpg
- File:Ferdino-rebello.jpg
- File:Benjamin-Silva.jpg
- File:Filipe Nery Rodrigues.jpg
- File:Farrel Furtado.jpg
- File:Farrel Furtado (cropped).jpg
- File:Mathany-Saldanha.jpg
- File:JoaquimAlemao.jpg
- File:Sheik-Hassan-Haroon.jpg
- File:Churchill Alemao.jpg
- File:Alvaro-De-Loyola-Furtado.jpg
- File:Manuel-Fernandes.jpg
- File:Arecio-D-Souza.jpg
- File:Jose Vaz Goa.jpg
- File:Shri-jit-arolkar 25020220316.1055.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
No evidence to support the claimed release into the public domain by the Goa Legislature Secretariat. The 'Terms & Conditions' page of the website includes no such release, nor any other basis for hosting these files on Commons.[25]
The licensing of files from a related source was discussed in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Shri-Viresh-Borkar.jpg, which resulted in deletion. It appears that several of these files have since been re-uploaded by the same uploader. Suspected re-uploads:
- File:Shri-viresh-borkar.jpg re-upload of File:Shri-Viresh-Borkar.jpg (definite)
- File:Shri-shrichandrakant-shetye.jpg re-upload of File:Shri-Chandrakant-Shetye.jpg
- File:Shri-shripravin-arlekar.jpg re-upload of File:Shri.-Pravin-Arlekar.jpg
- File:Venzy Viegas in 2022 Assembly.jpg re-upload of File:Venzy-Vieges_AAP.jpg
- File:Shri-jit-arolkar 25020220316.1055.jpg re-upload of File:Shri.-Jit-Arolkar.jpg
-- Verbcatcher (talk) 02:44, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Here's a statmen from the disclaimer of the website "1The official website of Goa Vidhansabha has been developed to provide information about the Goa Vidhansabha to the general public". Also it has to be taken into consideration that no copyright rights have been released on this state government site and is a public domain whatsoever. If in worse case, I suggest you not delete it but relicense it for educational purposes. Rejoy2003 04:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- An intention to provide information to the general public is not the same thing as a release of the content into the public domain, see Public domain. We cannot 'relicense it for educational purposes', only the copyright holders can relicense things. Verbcatcher (talk) 05:30, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete with caveat. I'm a bit leery when the Goa.gov.in copyright page [26] says "Material featured on this site may be reproduced free of charge in any format or media without requiring specific permission. This is subject to the material being reproduced accurately and not being used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context." The last part is the problem, that's not really a totally free license. Part of public domain is the ability to make derivative works that are derogatory or misleading. I did some searching, and I can find mention of some states adopting NDSAP (and this is also in the GODL-India template talk), but Goa is not mentioned. I understand were Rejoy2003 is coming from, but there is a copyright page on the site that definitely isn't public domain and doesn't appear compatible with the GODL which doesn't have the same restrictions. Commons doesn't relicense for educational purposes for the same reason it doesn't allow non-commercial use only licenses.
- I think a larger discussion on Template_talk:GODL-India with a notice left at Commons:Village_pump/Copyright and those involved in recent discussions around Goa state images would be very helpful for getting this resolved in a definitive manner. Ravensfire (talk) 14:53, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Also see the comments at Commons:Help_desk/Archive/2022/08#Image_Licensing concerning an image from the same site where a different license was considered inappropriate to use. The uploader also asked at Commons:Village_pump/Copyright/Archive/2022/09#Can_I_use_these_images_under_free_license? which was a bit more mixed (although the site mentioned by the last comment falls under the federal government of India, not a state government). All of this highlights the benefits of a larger discussion. Ravensfire (talk) 15:29, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Ravensfire, you need to go through all of the images I uploaded and their sources again. The website you mentioned in your first comment is completely different then the source mentioned. Like Verbcatcher mentioned above "The images seem like a duplicate of files re-uploaded" well it's not from the same source but it does seem like a duplicate whose quality is reduced and has been uploaded on another public state website "without any copyright rights released". Rejoy2003 21:42, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Rejoy2003: what do you mean by "without any copyright rights released"? Do you mean that the website does not explicitly claim any copyrights? This is insufficient for Commons, see COM:NETCOPYRIGHT. Verbcatcher (talk) 02:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Ravensfire: the files in this DR are from https://www.goavidhansabha.gov.in/, the Goa Legislative Assembly website. The earlier DR was for files from https://www.goa.gov.in/, the Government of Goa website, although several photos are on both websites. For this DR we should look at the Terms & Conditions page of the Assembly website, where there is no free license. My understanding is that {{GODL-India}} only applies to data published by the Government of India (i.e. the union or federal government), and not to the state governments or legislative assemblies. Verbcatcher (talk) 02:10, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Verbcatcher Both of those are state websites though, which was the point I was trying to make. Ravensfire (talk) 15:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- Better reply (hopefully). I agree that GODL-India appears to only apply to works from the federal government. I was trying to point out that the sources are both state owned, not federal government and GODL-India should not be used there. In the VP/C discussion I linked, @Carl Lindberg noted a prior deletion discussion at Commons:Deletion_requests/Template:Indian_Army that uses similar phrasing as Goa.gov.in and the restrictions are not considered copyright related (Commons:Non-copyright_restrictions#Authors'_moral_rights). That suggests that images pulled from a site such as goa.gov.in that has the same/similar phrasing for their copyright notice would be okay. They are NOT in the public domain though. I would suggest a template for the license similar to {{Indian Army}}, revamped for this case.
- I don't think this covers images sourced from goavidhansabha.gov.in, however. The frustrating part is those images probably ought to be covered, but there isn't a clear statement on that site about copyright. Very annoying. Ravensfire (talk) 19:15, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- The licensing statement on https://www.goa.gov.in/copyright/ looks fine to me. It's the same as the licensing statement discussed at Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Indian Army. Many of their government websites use similar language, and we should keep those. The seemingly-troubling language was deemed to be in relation to their moral rights, not the economic right, so are fine. The term "reproduction" in Indian copyright law covers most derivative works. So, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Shri-Viresh-Borkar.jpg was I think decided incorrectly, and should be restored. However, I see no such licensing statement at https://www.goavidhansabha.gov.in . GODL-India should basically never be used, unless (similarly) the source website states that is a license. We have been incorrectly applying that license for years; it pretty much is only in use on data.gov.in , which has no images, and I don't think I've seen it used anywhere else.
- So... I'm not sure I see where these images are licensed (let alone placed into the public domain; the statements on the government websites are licenses, and not public domain declarations). Commons has a "free" requirement, which means files must meet the requirements at http://freedomdefined.org -- in other words they can't have copyright (economic right in particular) restrictions which violate those. There is much information which is meant to be seen by the general public, however unless licensed freely enough we can't host it here. These seem to fall under that category, at the moment. Carl Lindberg (talk) 21:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- Comment To summarise it down for the editors, A template regarding one of the Goa government website is being in process here User:Ravensfire/Goa-Govt which will need more collaboration and proper documentation. The other site does seem it can go under the free licence, although we'll need a proper guide and consensus for that. Rejoy2003 04:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- That template is ONLY for goa.gov.in, files from https://www.goavidhansabha.gov.in/, which is most if not all of this request, are not covered and no evidence of a compatible license has been provided. "Oughts" and "Shoulds" are nice thoughts, but Commons needs clear direct evidence of a compatible license. Until that's given, these files should be deleted. Ravensfire (talk) 15:51, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- I won't take this discussion further on. To keep things simple and once again put forward my opinion, is to keep these files. It's been ages since Goa government launched their website and these images were available. The only thing what makes Indian army template to be in use is because large number of people are actually interested in that particular topic. Members of the Goa Legislative Assembly or simply put a state government of India, doesn't draw much attention of other editors or uploaders or are least bothered to. I'm glad I took this initiative and atleast try something and put forward my work regarding Goa government files. Also added to this, I wouldn't say my decision of licensing the file is absolute, since I'm too learning about how things go about on Wikimedia and how many editors on Wikipedia avoid uploading files here. Although I still believe these files must be kept for historical refrence or anything in particular for the readers to have a visual representation of that particular subject. Hoping the admins will look into this carefully before thinking to actually delete all of these files. Rejoy2003 22:37, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
- That template is ONLY for goa.gov.in, files from https://www.goavidhansabha.gov.in/, which is most if not all of this request, are not covered and no evidence of a compatible license has been provided. "Oughts" and "Shoulds" are nice thoughts, but Commons needs clear direct evidence of a compatible license. Until that's given, these files should be deleted. Ravensfire (talk) 15:51, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
- Comment To summarise it down for the editors, A template regarding one of the Goa government website is being in process here User:Ravensfire/Goa-Govt which will need more collaboration and proper documentation. The other site does seem it can go under the free licence, although we'll need a proper guide and consensus for that. Rejoy2003 04:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:25, 15 February 2023 (UTC)