Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2022/10/20

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Commons logo
Commons logo

This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests.

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Archive
Archive October 20th, 2022
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.

File:ArcGIS-Online.png

[edit]

Improperly used image Robbbie94 (talk) 04:18, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

{{speedydelete|<reason in prose>}} or the shortcut {{SD|<criterion code such as G7 for "author/uploader request", see list>}}. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjesri (talk • contribs) 04:25, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, G7. --Túrelio (talk) 07:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Mingus reedus.jpg

[edit]

I uploaded it by mistake Isa reedus28 (talk) 10:34, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: already yesterday. --Achim55 (talk) 10:40, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Anthony andrews.jpg

[edit]

I changed my mind, I don't want it to be publicly visible anymore Isa reedus28 (talk) 10:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: already yesterday. --Achim55 (talk) 10:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Bluetooth.svg

[edit]

As A pAs pA ap 209.249.13.220 14:18, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Achim55 (talk) 17:42, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Jaguar Style Stakes - 2014 Dubai World Cup (13506741095).jpg

[edit]

No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 09:12, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination - no argument from me and happy to clean up own uploads. --Nick (talk) 18:52, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Mert Ünal.png

[edit]

I accidentally uploaded the photo Bloodylord31 (talk) 19:47, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 20:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Raggio Di Luna (Moon Ray) - Comanchero.jpg

[edit]

copyvio © 2022 Discog Mateus2019 (talk) 11:33, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted by Ymblanter at 18:19, 20 October 2022 UTC: Copyright violation: Album cover artwork --Krdbot 01:32, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:MFS (Mother Fuckin Savage).png

[edit]

Uploader request / copyright violation Notawiki (talk) 23:34, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot of copywritten material with no free equivalent but I can see how it is not entirely necessary to have in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notawiki (talk • contribs) 23:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 06:59, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:NATASHA EMMANUEL 1.jpg

[edit]

Spam upload for a spam draft Dronebogus (talk) 11:57, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:15, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Ali Mirza World.jpg

[edit]

Source does not indicate a free license. Lymantria (talk) 15:28, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Copyvio so speedy. --Herby talk thyme 11:04, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Ali Mirza World.jpg

[edit]

out of scope Trade (talk) 22:00, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 06:34, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:India overtakes the UK as the world’s fifth-largest economy Explained.pdf

[edit]

Out of COM:SCOPE as an encyclopedia-style personal essay that's pure text, apart from (low quality copies of) embedded graphs which were CC-licenced from another source and which could/should be hosted at Commons by themselves. Lord Belbury (talk) 10:25, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:17, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Anadolu gucu spor.png

[edit]

Unused promotional image, out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 00:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:05, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Inverse Arkansas Election Results 2020.svg

[edit]

Not an actual map of anything, so out of scope. Elli (talk) 04:38, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:07, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:عمر يحيي.jpg

[edit]

Personal photo for non-wikipedian: out of scope. --Karim talk to me :)..! 05:14, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:07, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Omar yahya 124.jpg

[edit]

Personal photo for non-wikipedian: out of scope. --Karim talk to me :)..! 05:18, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:07, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Chemical Eqns.JPG

[edit]

Unused photo of hand-written chemical equations, no reasonable use except random decoration and it's not in use. DMacks (talk) 06:04, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:08, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Unnamedaa.gif

[edit]

Seems useless and out of scope. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:09, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Foreign Exchange Commission.jpg

[edit]

Seems useless, out of scope. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:27, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:09, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Void1351.png

[edit]

Blank image and so called in German. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:31, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:10, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Lā 'illāha 'illā Llāh, Muhammadur rasūlu Llāh.jpg

[edit]

useless due to extreme blur Mateus2019 (talk) 07:46, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:13, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:A Smart Home Adventure w Kate & Joanna (8024380825).jpg

[edit]

Useless digital conversion of a personal image, out of scope A1Cafel (talk) 08:46, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:14, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


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.

File:A Smart Home Adventure w Kate & Joanna (8024381545).jpg

[edit]

Useless digital conversion of a personal image, out of scope A1Cafel (talk) 08:46, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:14, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


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.

File:Before Creating the Chief of Avatars in 2020.jpg

[edit]

Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 09:07, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:15, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


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.

File:David Seco Paza.jpg

[edit]

Self portrait. Promotional use. MexTDT (talk) 14:19, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:16, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:MwRSF-logo.png

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo. Duplicate. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:42, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:16, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:EUTELSAT IGO LOGO 2022.jpg

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo. Duplicate. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:17, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by Kazisyfullah (talk · contribs)

[edit]

A number of very similar personal images that would appear to be outside the scope of our project. Commons is not a web hosting platform

Herby talk thyme 15:13, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 02:26, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Beliebiger Multiplikator.png

[edit]

unused formula that can better be typeset in TeX Jochen Burghardt (talk) 16:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:18, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Lisa yashodhara haller.jpg

[edit]

unused selfie Jochen Burghardt (talk) 16:52, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Jahid Hasan Scientist.jpg

[edit]

unused selfie Jochen Burghardt (talk) 17:07, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by Paulmullin (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 17:58, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:20, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by Yojana Mohata (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused photos of non-notable events and people, no context, no educational value, out of scope.

P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:28, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:21, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Marine tractor pulls OS2U on Funafuti Beach 1943.jpg

[edit]

This image is asserted to be PD because it is a US Navy photo. The source page provides no photo credit and the site's photo credit page is a generic list with no specifics by photo. This article credits the photo to AP (see photo 15 in the slideshow). It may very well be this is PD due to lack of notice but that would need to be demonstrated. Whpq (talk) 02:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Kept, (non-admin closure) Withdrawn per above -FASTILY 07:36, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

Copyvio + is that literally a photo of a screen?

Dronebogus (talk) 02:44, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Amada44  talk to me 15:27, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

OOS garbage

Dronebogus (talk) 12:50, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 13:28, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

Out of scope garbage

Dronebogus (talk) 21:15, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 10:33, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

Out of scope junk

Dronebogus (talk) 00:08, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:09, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

Out of scope

Dronebogus (talk) 12:17, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 13:07, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

OOS junk files

Dronebogus (talk) 12:07, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 13:56, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

OOS garbage

Dronebogus (talk) 20:08, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 10:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

More OOS junk

Dronebogus (talk) 16:30, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 10:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

OOS garbage

Dronebogus (talk) 06:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope junk

Dronebogus (talk) 22:07, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 07:10, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

OOS crap junk

Dronebogus (talk) 04:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:1

No copyright info + OOS

Dronebogus (talk) 05:18, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Yann (talk) 11:50, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Files in Category:1

Load of OOS crap

Dronebogus (talk) 17:57, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

More OOS crap

Dronebogus (talk) 05:54, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

Oos garbage

Dronebogus (talk) 15:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

OOS garbage

Dronebogus (talk) 20:27, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete per the nominator. BTW, I'm interested to know what the plan is for the category once it's empty. One could argue it should be deleted, but empty or not it seems like an important category...Although realistically there probably aren't going to be many (if any) files about the year 1. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:37, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:12, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

OOS garbage

Dronebogus (talk) 13:56, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted --Adamant1 (talk) 05:34, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

That was fast. More junk as usual

Dronebogus (talk) 01:32, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted The images were deleted. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:08, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

OOS garbage

Dronebogus (talk) 18:23, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted per nomination. --Yann (talk) 09:50, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

OOS garbage

Dronebogus (talk) 20:49, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 05:23, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

OOS garbage

Dronebogus (talk) 14:46, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nom, some apparent copyviols from social media. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:58, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

Out of scope crap

Dronebogus (talk) 05:30, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:44, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

Garbagé de OOS

Dronebogus (talk) 11:06, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 20:03, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

OOS garbage

Dronebogus (talk) 11:58, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:09, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.
Files in Category:1

OOS garbage

Dronebogus (talk) 18:24, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Personal photos of non-contributors. Kadı Message 19:22, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Considering that the photos starting with Kareem were uploaded today, isn't it premature to make the conclusion that that used is a non-contributor? So far, they are, but surely, we have to give them more than one day to show whether they will contribute. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:30, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There’s a long-standing pattern that people who upload random selfies in nonsense categories are not productive contributors. Most productive editors edit, THEN add purely decorative material like this. Dronebogus (talk) 00:45, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm aware of that policy. My point, since I guess it's not obvious, is that one day (or, for example, one week) is not long enough to know whether a user will be productive or not. If we want to prohibit users from uploading photos of themselves before uploading any other photo or making any other edits to articles that are not about them, a policy stating that needs to be made explicit. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:42, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ikan Kekek, These images which are linked above do not contain encyclopedic value, that's why they are being deleted. This policy is about that. If we accept these kind of photos, Commons would turn into Instagram. Your arguments are about assuming good faith and being tolerable which are valuable, but we need to look at this point of view also. Regards, Kadı Message 14:06, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • No we wouldn't. Users are allowed to upload a photo of themselves. We have to decide whether if a user uploads a photo of themselves, it should be the subject of a deletion request on the same day it is uploaded, which seems very rude to me, or whether we will be polite and give them a grace period. If not, we need to establish a new rule explicitly prohibiting such uploads with much more stringent specified exceptions than I believe are spelled out now, as I stated above. I suppose we need to have a discussion about this on Commons talk:Deletion requests. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:14, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure it's a formal policy that users are allowed to upload a photo of themselves. That may just be an informal courtesy. Do you know whether such an exception is clarified anywhere? I know that such photos are supposed to have a template on them, stating that they are not educationally useful and are subject to deletion when no longer in use on a user page, but that's a different though related matter. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:25, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ikan Kekek, please open a discussion, so everyone can have a chance to see it and then make comments. Kadı Message 14:32, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:41, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files in Category:1

[edit]

Instagram crap

Dronebogus (talk) 11:05, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 11:49, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files in Category:1

[edit]

Usual collection of Instagram crap

Dronebogus (talk) 01:55, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 13:23, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files in Category:1

[edit]

Oos garbage

Dronebogus (talk) 22:35, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 19:40, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files in Category:1

[edit]

Usual oos crap

Dronebogus (talk) 12:41, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 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)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:34, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files in Category:1

[edit]

Personal spam and potential copyright violations

Dronebogus (talk) 01:57, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:37, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:No mitä vittua tää on tää kuva.jpg

[edit]

out of scope Trade (talk) 22:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: already deleted by Elocobbola. --Rosenzweig τ 11:34, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Mudjawiki.jpg

[edit]

Image scraped from his youtube channel without permission. No.cilepogača (talk) 08:46, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Housssam Nasrawin speech at GFF Dubai UAE.jpg

[edit]

Image had a watermark of Global Financial Forum (GFF), I don't think this is uploader's work A1Cafel (talk) 09:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:37, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Artpaper Editions.png

[edit]

protected art work. no permission Hoyanova (talk) 09:22, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:36, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Srmhs-building.jpg

[edit]

Facebook-code in metadata; thereby unlikely own work. -- Túrelio (talk) 12:21, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:33, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by Dr. Sara Peterson (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Copyright violation. These artworks were made by Panmela Castro (born in 1981, so not dead for at least 70 years), uploaded by "Dr. Sara Peterson", but without a VRT ticket (see Commons:Volunteer Response Team for details).

JopkeB (talk) 12:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:32, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by Dr. Sara Peterson (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Copyright violation. These photos were made by Marcus Leoni (of Panmela Castro, born in 1981, so also the photographer cannot be dead for at least 70 years), uploaded by "Dr. Sara Peterson", but without a VRT ticket (see Commons:Volunteer Response Team for details).

JopkeB (talk) 12:45, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:19 A Noiva Panmela Castro - Matriz-1.jpg

[edit]

Copyright violation. According to the description, the photo was made by Panmela Castro, while the uploader is "Dr. Sara Peterson". I do not see a VRT ticket. (For details see Commons:Volunteer Response Team). JopkeB (talk) 12:52, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Cypress Grove & Lydia Lunch.jpg

[edit]

Credited " photo by Beatrice Ciuca" on EN WP - needs OTRS Gbawden (talk) 13:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:28, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files found with Special:Search/Rusty Egan incategory:"Musicians from the United Kingdom"

[edit]

Rusty Egan shot by Adam Szigeti - needs OTRS from Szigeti

Gbawden (talk) 13:16, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:27, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Neil-Buchanan-80s.jpg

[edit]

1980s photo, tightly cropped, only upload of this user, no exif. I know its been here since 2004 but doesn't mean its not a likely copyvio Gbawden (talk) 13:19, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:27, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by Corkman1345 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Suspect copyvio. Small sizes, inconsistent metadata and at least one source (J Doyle Construction, archived in the Wayback Machine) does not seem to back up the CC0 claim.

Brianjd (talk) 13:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:27, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Схема организации опроса "Минимакс".png

[edit]

Not in use, out of scope. Xunks (talk) 13:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:26, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Joe Innes.jpg

[edit]

Claimed as own work but taken from FB per MD. Needs OTRS Gbawden (talk) 13:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Foad Mostafa-Soltani.jpg

[edit]

Copyrighted. The source does not state any license. HeminKurdistan (talk) 15:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by Qaramalitawdan (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagrams. Should be in SVG if useful.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Aiyon F.jpg

[edit]

Possible copyvio: Most likely not own work becuse of the watermark on the bottom right CoffeeEngineer (talk) 17:03, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:22, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Mystik brand-Current design.png

[edit]

Unusual justification for PD ViperSnake151 (talk) 17:45, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete it!
If I had my druthers, everything I've ever done on Wikipedia would be deleted.
    — BoringJim (talk) BoringJim (talk) 05:19, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:21, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Gareth McLearnon September 2021.jpg

[edit]

Publicity photo as stated, unlikely to be own work, found here etc https://www.wmshaynes.com/gareth-mclearnon Gbawden (talk) 17:57, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:20, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Monica Gutierrez Artero.jpg

[edit]

Offensichtliche Fehllizenzierung als "Eigenes Werk"- Bild zeigt aber angebliche Urheberin, es handelt sich aber zweifelllos nicht um ein Selfie Lutheraner (talk) 18:08, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Photo 2021-01-18 22-35-54-gigapixel-scale-6 00x.jpg

[edit]

This photo was certainly not created by the uploader. Maybe someone can find a suitable PD license for it? Mosbatho (talk) 18:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by Digitalpixcel (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Likely not own works: low-res/web-size images with disparate quality and styles, missing EXIF data, and magazine cover.

P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:21, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Assaf Yechezkely.jpg

[edit]

A formal PR picture of an Israeli reporter, clearly taken by a photographer. It cannot stay in the Commons without a proper OTRS release note. Ldorfman (talk) 19:28, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:18, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Ido Salomon.jpg

[edit]

A formal PR picture of an Israeli reporter, clearly taken by a photographer. It cannot stay in the Commons without a proper OTRS release note. Ldorfman (talk) 19:31, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 16:18, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Therizinosaurus cheloniformis by teratophoneus dd17t11-fullview.webp

[edit]

No indication of a free license at source ([1]) SlvrHwk (talk) 00:15, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:40, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Aniket-dey-office.jpg

[edit]

Likely copyvio. Own work claim doubtful. Photo seems to be taken from here. 74.73.224.126 01:45, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:40, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Aniketdey-updated.png

[edit]

Likely copyvio. Own work claim doubtful. Photo seems to be taken from here. 74.73.224.126 01:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:40, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:MHHS Huskies Logo.png

[edit]

 Delete Copyright violation of https://www.bwrsd.org/Domain/8. There's no evidence at the source of a license compatible with Commons. Hammersoft (talk) 01:53, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:40, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Dennis adalah salah satu dari 20 Pemenang Lomba Foto Pancasila.jpg

[edit]

Watermark, inactive source link, no EXIF, so seemingly probable copyvio and not clear if it's in scope or not. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:40, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:39, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Dr. Adhyaksa Dault .jpg

[edit]

Notable person, but seems like a copyvio, given the size and lack of EXIF info. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:39, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Devin adalah salah satu dari 20 Pemenang Lomba Foto Pancasila.jpg

[edit]

Watermark and probable copyvio, like the others in this series. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:02, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Sigit adalah salah satu dari 20 Pemenang Lomba Foto Pancasila.jpg

[edit]

Watermark, probably copyvio. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:03, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Soebijanto adalah salah satu dari 20 Pemenang Lomba Foto Pancasila.jpg

[edit]

Watermark, probably copyvio. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:04, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Riaarma adalah salah satu dari 20 Pemenang Lomba Foto Pancasila.jpg

[edit]

Watermark, probably copyvio. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:04, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Nathalia adalah salah satu dari 20 Pemenang Lomba Foto Pancasila.jpg

[edit]

Watermark, probably copyvio. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:KPPUINSGD adalah salah satu dari 20 Pemenang Lomba Foto Pancasila.jpg

[edit]

Watermark, probably copyvio. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Melda adalah salah satu dari 20 Pemenang Lomba Foto Pancasila.jpg

[edit]

Watermark, probably copyvio. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Fery adalah salah satu dari 20 Pemenang Lomba Foto Pancasila.jpg

[edit]

Watermark, probably copyvio. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:شريف جابر.jpg

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work. Facebook profile image, since June 2021 (F1). --Karim talk to me :)..! 03:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:37, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:MBK Partners.jpg

[edit]

This file has been superseded by MBK Partners.png. File is outdated duplicate. File is no longer needed. Imcdc (talk) 05:16, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Didym (talk) 17:36, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Сотовый салон.jpg

[edit]

Copyright violation: stewardess render is copyrighted https://www.renderhub.com/printedreality/emirates-airline-stewardess-ready-for-full-color-3d-printing Drakosh (talk) 06:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:36, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Shahbaz Islam.jpg

[edit]

Obvious professional shoot, also an advert. Just the wrong side of the G10 border. Pictures without camera details tend to be suspect. We require a very much better declaration of source and/or permissions. See COM:VRT. Potential copyright violation. COM:PCP applies. 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 06:54, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:36, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:In memoriam, ich gedenke deiner.jpg

[edit]

copyvio (text and artwork) Mateus2019 (talk) 07:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:35, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Peter Ketelaars.jpg

[edit]

copyvio see metadata that clearly state "Author Grietje Mesman Copyright holder www.grietjemesman.nl" Hoyanova (talk) 07:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:34, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:בפומטהא.jpg

[edit]

low quality duplicate of existing images, attribution dubious Poliocretes (talk) 08:09, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:33, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Advertisement Showing Wired-In Monk - Yangon - Myanmar (Burma) (11751358676).jpg

[edit]

probably fully copyrighted image (the license stated here refers to the photograph not the motif) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:36, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 17:32, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:A Night on Broadway (1929) (3580588919).jpg

[edit]

Author died in 1964, still protected by copyright A1Cafel (talk) 08:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Artist de:Franz Paul Glass died in 1964, so the file can be restored in 2035. --Rosenzweig τ 06:29, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Ballet & Pantomime "Columbine" (1920) (32257782943).jpg

[edit]

Artist died in 1961, still protected by copyright A1Cafel (talk) 08:49, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Artist de:Walter Schnackenberg died in 1961, so the file can be restored in 2032. --Rosenzweig τ 06:30, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Bally shoes (1924) (16043934941).jpg

[edit]

Artist died in 1985, still protected by copyright A1Cafel (talk) 08:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Artist de:Alois Carigiet died in 1985, so the file can be restored in 2056. --Rosenzweig τ 06:27, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Sias International Culture Week 2019 (49037023982).jpg

[edit]

COM:POSTERs are temporarily works, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 02:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 14:48, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Soul Revival Mural at Peters Park Boston.jpg

[edit]

Recent artwork - US does not have freedom of panorama for artworks. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:39, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 14:49, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Robert Iler NYC Jan. '19. (cropped).png

[edit]

Files was removed from Flickr, unknown copyright status A1Cafel (talk) 03:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP. --Wdwd (talk) 14:51, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Fellow-Programm Freies Wissen Auftaktveranstaltung 2020 Tag 2 29.png

[edit]

Did not give allowance to upload this profile of mine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thamarama (talk • contribs) 13:46, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Depicted person revoked her permission for publication (see comment above). Please delete. Anna Gödeke (WMDE) (talk) 07:12, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
She's not notable, anyway, is she? If not, that's a good enough reason to delete. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Unused personal photo/F10. --Wdwd (talk) 15:09, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Erotic furry art of a dragon generated by NovelAI.png

[edit]

Non-artistic pornography JungleEntity (talk) 07:35, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep In use. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I uploaded this to illustrate NovelAI's generation of erotic art, which is discussed at length in the article for the subject, and some other similar AI image generation things (e.g. DALL-E) prohibit sexual content, so an example seems appropriate. Waxworker (talk) 07:45, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Waxworker I assume you are referring to the English Wikipedia’s article on NovelAI. The article only says that the service can generate sexual material; I would say that the references to sexual material are incidental. The article does not mention other services prohibiting sexual material. I certainly do not think the article describes the matter ‘at length’. Brianjd (talk) 11:21, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've struck "at length", after rereading the article I agree it's an inaccurate descriptor. It should be noted that the image is no longer in use on the article for NovelAI after multiple editors took issue with the image, but I think my point about the image having encyclopedic value still stands and I agree with the points brought up by Brianjd below. Waxworker (talk) 02:54, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep It is irrelevant whether it is ‘artistic’ or ‘pornography’ or how well other projects cover this subject. All that matters is whether it has a realistic educational use. It clearly does: this seems to be the only Commons file depicting sexual material generated by an AI, and it should be obvious (even before reading Waxworker’s comment above) that that is an important subject. Brianjd (talk) 11:23, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per discussion. --Wdwd (talk) 15:11, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:"Marienstudio" (2019).jpg

[edit]

copyvio of a recent artwork (unknown source, unknown artist) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:12, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:16, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:HAUS DER KUNST (8083954721).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:16, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:17, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Einfach so genießen. (7925012636).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:16, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:17, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Das trägt man diesen Sommer! (8469177310).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:18, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:17, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Ich freue mich auf Ihren Besuch (8483621562).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:20, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:17, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:München (9490652904).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:21, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:17, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:München (9494801017).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:21, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:17, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:München (9495476205).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:22, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:17, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:München (9495515837).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Haus der Kunst August 2021 08.jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep that is a picture that advertises the exhibition, not art or a temporary installation of art itself. And there is always a poster advertising the current exhibitiion on this wall. So, clearly fop here. --Ordercrazy (talk) 13:49, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, @Ordercrazy: Please see Commons:Copyright_rules_by_subject_matter#Posters. --Wdwd (talk) 15:19, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:München (9495518231).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:27, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Haus der Kunst Muenchen-3.jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nach neun Jahren: Du bist echt schnellǃ Klar, bitte löschen. --Rufus46 (talk) 17:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:27, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:München (9498245230).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:27, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:München (9498268978).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:25, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:27, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:München (9498289026).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:25, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:27, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Haus der Kunst Muenchen-4.jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:25, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nach neun Jahren: Du bist echt schnellǃ Klar, bitte löschen. --Rufus46 (talk) 17:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:28, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:München (9498323954).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:29, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:München (9495169599).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:27, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:30, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:München, magasins du Tal (3).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:29, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:30, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:TRAUMBILDER (9495057277).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:29, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:31, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:VON 0 AUF 19 IN 1 SEKUNDE (9497981748).jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:30, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:31, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:20160722 020 libramont.jpg

[edit]

COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 09:01, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:57, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by 623B (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Footer of https://reeltoreel.cz says that its content is released under a CC BY-ND 4.0 licence. The ND means this is not compatible with Commons, per Commons:Licensing#Forbidden_licenses.

Lord Belbury (talk) 13:03, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 16:03, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Alguien se ha robado nuestra paz 2022.png

[edit]

no es la adecuada Jaime Guadalupe Lobato (talk) 03:16, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 19:27, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Goldie Hawn Words Can Heal.jpg

[edit]

Files from bad author list, dubious copyright status A1Cafel (talk) 03:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 19:27, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Good Kid.jpg

[edit]

The video is dead, there's no proof that this is the band, and there's no valid copyright information. Scrooge200 (talk) 04:12, 20 October 2022 (UTC) Scrooge200 (talk) 04:13, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 19:28, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files in Category:Partners Statue

[edit]

COM:DW of copyrighted works.

Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:12, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Addition,

--Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:46, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:46, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files in Category:Partners Statue

[edit]

No FOP in the US. See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Partners Statue at Magic Kingdom & Commons:Deletion requests/File:"Partners"- Taken by Mackenzie Conway.jpg

Elisfkc (talk) 16:33, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 19:30, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Aditya singh bhadoria.jpg

[edit]

out of scope? Trade (talk) 22:49, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: in scope but unlikely own work. --GPSLeo (talk) 19:44, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Shubhamdas.jpg

[edit]

out of scope? Trade (talk) 22:52, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment I was going to say yes, out of scope, but does the fact that he has a blog on the notable Times of India newspaper's site means we can keep the photo? Would we keep a photo of someone who had a blog on the New York Times or Times of London's site? If we would, we should keep this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:24, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: maybe in scope but unlikely own work. --GPSLeo (talk) 19:45, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:HKH-Glacier-Mass-Change.png

[edit]

I am the original uploader of this file. User:Lemonaka nominated it for Speedy Deletion because they claim it is "© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG. Part of Springer Nature". However, the source publication has a "Bibliographic Information" section, where it mentions "License CC BY". I believe this allows non-commercial usage here. Thus, I replaced the original speedy deletion request with this regular deletion request, as apparently this is the standard procedure to appeal deletions. --InformationToKnowledge (talk) 22:57, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: CC BY 4.0 license is correct. --GPSLeo (talk) 19:47, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:München - Haus der Kunst.jpg

[edit]

copyvio (temporary installation, therefore no FOP) Mateus2019 (talk) 08:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

weak  Keep. COM:DM may apply in this case.--Wdwd (talk) 15:29, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. No chance for Beiwerk (de minimis) per the 2014 decision by the Federal Court of Justice, see COM:DM Germany. --Rosenzweig τ 21:41, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:HansRott.jpg

[edit]

Copyright violation. Obviously revenant of File:Hans Rott.jpg which has been deleted in 2007 due to copyright violation. As far as I remember, Uew Harten claims "editio princeps" privilege from his first publication in 2000. See Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Hans Rott.jpg for the previous deletion request. FordPrefect42 (talk) 22:54, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, to be restored in 2026. --Rosenzweig τ 21:45, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Mv5nhrtolc22.jpg

[edit]

Is this own work? The watermark suggests a different source. No metadata. See also the talk page of the user. Wouter (talk) 19:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:19, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:ToprakM Logo.svg

[edit]

This file was initially tagged by 78.183.108.228 as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: G1+F2+F4. Previous nomination was F10, but the user is a contributor. Recommend  Keep. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mdaniels5757, that file only contains a logo that the uploader made just for himself. And you can't interfere with whether people recommend " Keep" or not. Regards. --78.183.108.228 18:12, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll provide an expanded rationale. Let's go through the various criteria for speedy deletion you cited earlier:
  • G1: "Test page, accidental creation, or page containing nonsense or no valid content." None of these apply here; the content was not gibberish.
  • F2: "Fair use content." This is not fair use, but properly licensed content.
  • F4: "Failed license review." There was no license review and no failure.
  • F10: "Personal photos by non-contributors." The uploader is a contributor.
It being clear that speedy deletion isn't appropriate, I now move to your apparent problem: that the file is "a logo that the uploader made just for himself". But "the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page of Commons or another project is allowed as long as that user is or was an active participant on that project." (See COM:INUSE.) So this image is acceptable.
Re your complaint of interference: I am not interfering with anything. Instead, I making clear that I, despite my procedural nomination, support keeping the image, because it's unusual for people to nominate a file they want to keep for deletion and closing admins (including myself) have overlooked this before.
Yours, —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:18, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep: Covered by COM:PS: The uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page of Commons or another project is allowed as long as that user is or was an active participant on that project. ToprakM is admin on tr:wp and uses this logo for their bot which has 140,000+ edits. --Achim55 (talk) 19:21, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, @ToprakM is an administrator on Turkish Wikipedia. I am also complaining to him because he blocked the IP range 78.183.0.0/16 on Turkish Wikipedia for 3 months (since 10/02/22). Another IP address starting with 78.183 has vandalized some pages on Turkish Wikipedia. When @ToprakM realized this, he directly blocked the IP range 78.183.0.0/16. 78.183.108.228 19:54, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Kadı Message 11:36, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:2013 Contest Winner and Judges (9984209743).jpg

[edit]

Photo courtesy of Ohio DNR Division of Wildlife, a state-level agency, not a work from the US Federal Government, and the PD license is invalid A1Cafel (talk) 02:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 18:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Dubai Creek famous prestigious buildings of its time.png

[edit]

No FoP in UAE. The image focus too much on the modern building, no a general skyline view A1Cafel (talk) 09:02, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 18:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Dubai Marina (15248363354).jpg

[edit]

No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 09:09, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 18:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Sculpture, Toulouse, Midi-Pyrénées, France - panoramio.jpg

[edit]

No freedom of panorama in France A1Cafel (talk) 09:14, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 18:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:New York City, May 2014 - 071.JPG

[edit]

No FoP for 3D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 09:20, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 18:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Yoon Suk-yeol and Fumio Kishida 20220922.jpg

[edit]

The Open Government License of Korea had 4 versions, some disabled commercial use and/or creation of derivative works, simply a link of KOGL in not enough A1Cafel (talk) 09:46, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 18:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Korea Power Exchange 2019.jpg

[edit]

No freedom of panorama in South Korea A1Cafel (talk) 11:36, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 18:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:차바이오컴플렉스판교.jpg

[edit]

No freedom of panorama in South Korea A1Cafel (talk) 11:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 18:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:London Bridge, Lake Havasu City, Arizona (3227034523).jpg

[edit]

No FOP in the US. See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Partners Statue at Magic Kingdom & Commons:Deletion requests/File:"Partners"- Taken by Mackenzie Conway.jpg for a similar statue Elisfkc (talk) 16:27, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 18:35, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Alerce1.jpeg

[edit]

Source is from the Ministry of Interior, not the Presidency of Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 17:09, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 15:15, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Alerce2.jpeg

[edit]

Source is from the Ministry of Interior, not the Presidency of Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 17:09, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 15:15, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:2016 07 10 FS UWC NF CD (48249375586).jpg

[edit]

Courtesy photo by Chad Douglas, not from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 02:36, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:06, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Date Unknown-Courtesyoflocalrancher-HorsePower in the Curlew national Grasslands (51046524921).jpg

[edit]

Image courtesy of Local Rancher, not a work from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 02:58, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep The Forest Service attests that the images are in the public domain, which can mean that they were made public prior to 1964, and either never registered for a copyright, or were never renewed. --RAN (talk) 12:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:06, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Date Unknown-Courtesyoflocalrancher-Work in the Curlew national Grasslands (51045796428).jpg

[edit]

Image courtesy of Local Rancher, not a work from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 02:58, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep The Forest Service attests that the images are in the public domain, which can mean that they were made public prior to 1964, and either never registered for a copyright, or were never renewed. --RAN (talk) 12:22, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:06, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Enbo Fight Club.jpg

[edit]

This file has been superseded by Enbo Fight Club.png. Image is outdated duplicate and serves no purpose Imcdc (talk) 05:14, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:06, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Orações em tupi antigo.pdf

[edit]

Duplicate of this file, also uploaded by me. It’s not used anywhere. RodRabelo7 (talk) 07:06, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:07, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by K-kuzhalism (talk · contribs)

[edit]

This would seem an excessive number of personal files to be hosting here. Whatever the needs of Foundation projects this number of images appear to be making use of Commons as a hosting platform

Herby talk thyme 11:30, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I confess I had no idea of nationality at all. It is not something significant to me on this multi cultural/lingual project. One or two images seems fine - 40+ seems excessive however the community will decide not me. Herby talk thyme 13:53, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination and likely copyvio. The one that was inuse had no meaningful exif, we can undelete with OTRS. --Gbawden (talk) 15:53, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Elena Kagan participles in trivia at the University of Chicago in 1992.jpg (and three others)

[edit]

These four files all claim that they were taken by an employee of the Executive Office of the President of the United States, but that seems very unlikely since Kagan had no connection to the Presidency at the time they were taken (one is a family portrait from when she was nine). It is true that they were all posted on the White House website, but the copyright is presumably still held by the original non-government photographers or their employers. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 04:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Per https://web.archive.org/web/20100521194317/http://www.whitehouse.gov/copyright, "Except where otherwise noted, third-party content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License." It's not otherwise noted, so change to CC-BY-3.0? —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:34, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you're comfortable assuming that the White House managed to find the photographer for a forty-year-old photo like this one and secure his consent to freely license it, I suppose that's fine, but I'd prefer to delete unless there's actual evidence of that. (The third-party language seems to be referring to things that visitors post on the website themselves, e.g. en:We the People (petitioning system).) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 20:18, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:54, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Take A Bow (136445731).jpeg

[edit]

Looks like a shop window. The picture is therefore probably not permanently housed there. Accordingly, the image is not protected by the freedom of panorama. Copyright is being violated here. Lukas Beck (talk) 10:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Valuable document of the impact of the death of David Bowie in Berlin. Blurred the copyrighted part, so that's not an issue anymore. Darwin Ahoy! 02:30, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination -- photo blurred, so has no educational use. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:55, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by PODZO DI BORGO (talk · contribs)

[edit]

All delcared as CC-BY-SA self but like File:L'Arroseur_arrosé,_film_de_Louis_Lumière_(1895).jpg is old and not uploaders work or File:Curtis Choy with a CP-15 16mm camera (cropped).jpg which is maybe cropped File:Tireuse 35 mm Debrie Tipro.jpg which may be scanned by the uploader but not made the photo. So I don't think we can trust the uploader on all his other upload claiming he is the author.

Avron (talk) 10:33, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bonsoir,
Je ne comprends absolument pas le sens de votre démarche. Une grande partie des documents que vous proposez à la suppression ont été photographiés par mes soins et beaucoup d'autres aussi proviennent directement de Wiki Commons. Quelques-uns (photogrammes de films) ont été capturés par mes soins pour illustrer des films qui ne diraient rien aux lecteurs sans ces documents. Je suis en effet collectionneur de caméras argentiques (j'en possède 139 exactement) et d'une trentaine d'appareils de projection. Que faut-il que je fasse pour empêcher cette destruction de masse et d'information ?
Good evening,
I absolutely do not understand the meaning of your approach. Many of the documents you propose for deletion have been photographed by me and many others also come directly from Wiki Commons. Some (stills of films) were captured by me to illustrate films which would mean nothing to readers without these documents. I am indeed a collector of film cameras (I own 139 exactly) and about thirty projection devices. What should I do to prevent this mass and information destruction? PODZO DI BORGO (talk) 18:18, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello PODZO DI BORGO, I would like to have all the photos but you have used "own work" on many files where you are not the author like File:L'Arroseur_arrosé,_film_de_Louis_Lumière_(1895).jpg. It is important to know where you are the real photographer and where not. Scanning or photogphing a photo doesn't make you the author.Avron (talk) 10:01, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The principle adopted by you : he makes a mistake, therefore everything is wrong in his contributions, is a rather revolting aberration. Yes, I scanned a frame from Louis Lumière's film; the scan being made by me, I correctly marked that this document had been made by me. Retorting that it was Louis Lumière who shot the film is an aberration and very shocking. On Wikipedia France, I am the only one who knows early cinema well and it was I in particular who specified that Louis Lumière was the only inventor of the Cinematograph camera, and not "the Lumière brothers". To pretend that I wanted to steal this image from Louis Lumière's film is cruel, to say the least! Presenting this element to me as proof that everything else is false, I can't believe my eyes! My personal portraits (PODZO DI BORGO is my nickname, my name is Jean-Claude Morin) ar false ? The photos of my wife Marie-France Briselance were taken by me, they ar false also ? Cinema accessories (cameras, projector, etc) are parts of my collection and they are on photos taken by me, false ? I also took pictures of equipment at the permanent exhibition of the Cinémathèque française, false of course ǃ If you delete everything, I will put them back (big work, thank youǃ), this time using my real name. Recommendation: read a few articles from Wikipedia France before brandishing the axe! PODZO DI BORGO (talk) 14:18, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please, no offense to you, we can clarify this. But we have a Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle. And on commons we get every day tons of images with from people they have just taken from the internet but claim they are the author. And if we find photo with are clearly false claim, so how can we trust the uploader for other photos? So please change the images where you aren't the copyrightholder to the correct information. For File:L'Arroseur arrosé, film de Louis Lumière (1895).jpg the author is Louis Lumière and the license is pd-old. I've done this for this file and File:Les Kiriki, acrobates japonais, film réalisé par Segundo de Chomón (1907).jpg as an example.Avron (talk) 17:00, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
P.S.: In File:Jean-Claude Morin sur le tournage du téléfilm "La Tisane de sarments" (1979).jpg Jean-Claude Morin is shown, but also it is said that he is the author. That is physically not possible. Maybe you are somehow the copyright-owner but not the author.Avron (talk) 06:40, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What a pity to read something like this ǃ Yes, it is impossible to take a photo of I, but it is with my camera that my friend, Philippe Théaudière (director of photography of the film) took this picture during a rehearsal. He did not claim to be the author of the picture I keep in my personnal photo-library. Copyright-owner, yes I am. It is the same thing, the same rights... Other pictures show me (Jean-Claude Morin) or my wife Marie-France Briselance. Made with my camera. I have at home a collection of 155 old film camera and other cine-tools. I took pictures of them for enhancing many Wikipedia articles. Majority of them are proposed to be erased. It is absurdǃ PODZO DI BORGO (talk) 17:04, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But your claim is: "own work", which you admit is not true, Why don't you write author: "Philippe Théaudière" and change the licence accordingly? You claim also "own work" for images like File:Conducteur de bruitage du film "Victory" (1913).jpg or File:Acte_de_naissance_au_Minihic-sur-Rance_(France)_de_William_Kennedy_Laurie_Dickson_(1860-8-3).jpg and many others. Instead of clarifying, where are you real author, where you might have copyrights or where the license may be pd-old or whatever all you do is lamenting how bad the world is. Avron (talk) 07:23, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: most of them, deleted some as noted above. Some of the deleted files can perhaps be restored with a COM:VRT permission if noted, or when more information is given about the actual source (like the publication something was taken from), year and place of creation/publication. Or at least a year for the restoration can be set, like I already have done for a few files where I felt there was enough information. --Rosenzweig τ 19:51, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by PODZO DI BORGO (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Not PD and certainly not CC0

— Racconish 💬 12:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete There seems to be an authorship dispute around this film (), but both of the two contenders were still alive in 1952. Felix QW (talk) 17:20, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:00, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by PODZO DI BORGO (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Not PD yet and not CC0.

— Racconish 💬 13:16, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:00, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files in Category:Cinderella Castle at Magic Kingdom

[edit]

No FOP in the US. See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Partners Statue at Magic Kingdom & Commons:Deletion requests/File:"Partners"- Taken by Mackenzie Conway.jpg

Elisfkc (talk) 16:18, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:01, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Stèle du code de Hammurabi, découpage 4.jpg

[edit]

Copyright infringement: the Louvre website does not authorize copies under this licence. Zunkir (talk) 19:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Le Louvre fait exception pour les, je site "les publications numériques à vocation scientifique ou pédagogique." dont Wikipédia me semble faire partie.
Voir les conditions général d'utilisation du site article 4.1.1 paragraphe a [3]https://collections.louvre.fr/page/cgu#ART4 Mazapan3210 (talk) 07:02, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, Wikipedia and the Commons are not the same thing, and the policy at the Commons is very strict: images hosted here must be free of all restrictions (see Commons:Licensing). That means that they must allow any kind of use, for any purpose, including commercial use, which the terms of use on the Louvre web site do not permit. So although you are free to use the Louvre photos for many other educational purposes, they should not be uploaded here, and you should not assign them a new license (CC 4.0) that allows for commercial use. Choliamb (talk) 12:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Stèle du code de Hammurabi découpage 2.jpg

[edit]

Copyright infringement: the Louvre website does not authorize copies under this licence. Zunkir (talk) 19:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Le Louvre fait exception pour les, je site "les publications numériques à vocation scientifique ou pédagogique." dont Wikipédia me semble faire partie.
Voir les conditions général d'utilisation du site article 4.1.1 paragraphe a [4]https://collections.louvre.fr/page/cgu#ART4 Mazapan3210 (talk) 07:03, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See above. Choliamb (talk) 12:30, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Stèle du code de Hammurabi, découpage 3.jpg

[edit]

Copyright infringement: the Louvre website does not authorize copies under this licence. Zunkir (talk) 19:42, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Le Louvre fait exception pour les, je site "les publications numériques à vocation scientifique ou pédagogique." dont Wikipédia me semble faire partie.
Voir les conditions général d'utilisation du site article 4.1.1 paragraphe "a" https://collections.louvre.fr/page/cgu#ART4 Mazapan3210 (talk) 07:05, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See above. Choliamb (talk) 12:30, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Jgcarpenter2021.jpg

[edit]

unused selfie Jochen Burghardt (talk) 17:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Nomination withdrawn. --IronGargoyle (talk) 05:43, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Julie Carpenter.jpg

[edit]

unused selfie Jochen Burghardt (talk) 17:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Nomination withdrawn. --IronGargoyle (talk) 05:43, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:São Paulo State Flag map.png

[edit]

Redundant with and of lower quality than File:Flag map of Sao' Paulo.png. Solon 26.125 04:15, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per COM:INUSE. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:28, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:São Paulo flag map large.png

[edit]

Redundant with and of lower quality than File:Flag map of Sao Paulo.png. Solon 26.125 04:16, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per COM:INUSE. --Gestumblindi (talk) 21:29, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:HFC official logo.png

[edit]

Claimed as own work. Unlikely to be the case. Should be uploaded through wikipedia as a fair use, not through commons TheFixer321 (talk) 13:35, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, can you do it for me please? I don't know exactly how to do it. Anyways I wrote in the image's description where I've taken the image from and that I removed the background from it. Wikidoge04 (talk) 21:21, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Эlcobbola talk 23:11, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Viona Ielegems at the victorian picnic 2009.jpg

[edit]

It is me in the picture and I don't want it to be published on internet. Thanks a lot for your understanding. Viona.ielegems (talk) 10:51, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to hear this, of course I second the request to delete. Motophil (talk) 10:58, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! Thanks so much, Phil. I just need to start a new chapter in my life and it's hard when I keep on dragging the past with me. Best greetings, Viona Viona.ielegems (talk) 09:19, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In use at de:Wave-Gotik-Treffen. Brianjd (talk) 11:36, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep The subject has her own category, her own Wikidata item and articles on four Wikipedias (linked from the Wikidata item). Usually, such well-known people don’t get to simply say they don’t want their picture published, especially when said picture was taken in a public place (I assume it was). Brianjd (talk) 15:52, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I am not a well-known person and for personal reasons I wish to have this picture deleted. Thank you. Viona Viona.ielegems (talk) 11:27, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want this snapshot of me being published on Wikimedia Commons or Wikipedia. It's a part of my past and I do not with it to be public domain. It is harmful for my current personal life and reputation. I am not active as a gothic photographer since many years. Thank you very much for your cooperation. Viona.ielegems (talk) 10:52, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]


  •  Delete This photo seems to have been taken in Germany. German personality rights Allgemeines Personlichkeitsrecht include right to dispose fully of one’s own image in public and to decide on one’s own merchandising and also right of one’s own picture. ie. in the absence of any model release / contract, the right to commercial exploitation of one's own image vests exclusively in the model. SinghIsFxing (talk) 16:13, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep (Cat Stevens) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 08:49, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment If the photo was taken in Germany, the author did not have the authority to release it under CC-BY-SA-3.0 in the absence of a model release, so there never was a valid licence in the first place. Also see COM:CSCR for Germany. PS: What is Cat Stevens in this context ?SinghIsFxing (talk) 16:19, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @SinghIsFxing I was going to link to COM:CSCR#Germany anyway, but you could also have done so. That section and the article it links to are not very clear: Is a person who is notable enough to have articles in four Wikipedias in the sphere of Zeitgeschichte?
    In any case, I don’t see what this has to do with copyright. If this is indeed the own work of the uploader, there should be no copyright problem. Brianjd (talk) 08:16, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    1. The present case would not fall in the sphere of Zeitgeschichte. (as it stands today after various judgements). Also there is no German language Wikipedia to establish her notability in Germany.
    2. Under German law, in the absence of an agreement between the photographer and the subject - even for images taken in a public place, the long term publication and valuable exploitation rights vest in the subject who can control their usage. The photographer cannot override those rights through a CC-BY-SA. SinghIsFxing (talk) 12:33, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    1. It is well-established that consent is required for people who are not in the sphere of Zeitgeschichte. But how do we know whether this person is in the sphere of Zeitgeschichte?
    2. Applying a CC BY-SA license does not override the need for consent, but as far as I know, the lack of consent does not invalidate the CC BY-SA license either. They are completely separate things. We could use the file, and the subject would be able to take action under German personality rights law (only to the extent we were under German jurisdiction), but the photographer would not be able to take action for copyright infringement.
    Brianjd (talk) 12:42, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Tuvalkin I second that question: What does Cat Stevens mean? Brianjd (talk) 08:16, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete § 23 (1) No. 3 KUG (expendable consent for photographs taken at assemblies the depicted person attended) requires that the assembly is recognizable as such. In this picture the person isolated. You cannot see it was at the named gathering (i.e. context). ‑‑ Kays (T | C) 16:00, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep SinghIsFxing, first this is a belgium photographer, so there is no need to have a "German language Wikipedia to establish her notability in Germany", as there is no requirement in any specific language, fact would be well know to anyone that has more than a mere two days of registration and very small number of edits in any wikimedia project (but then again this lack of edits will probably continue as SinghIsFxing was blocked in english wikipedia as a sockpuppet).

But, just to answer to this novel argument, as belgian (as wikimedia says) there is a french and dutch articles, besides two other languages. Alas, as the brazilian Época magazine says in [an article about the victorian nostalgia and revivalism that one inspiration of some brazilians took were from this photographer (in portuguese she is also wrongly called as being swedish "Uma das inspirações deles é o trabalho da fotógrafa sueca Viona Ielegems, que vive na Alemanha."). And by the way this is not the single mention in brazilian sites about this photographer. So it is a bit difficult to believe that this photographer is not a public person when there are at least two articles about this photographer in a different country, continent and language, talk about this photographer, in particular the fact that this photographer was the organizer of an victorian picnic in Wave-Gotik-Treffenwhere (WGT) this photo was taken. This fact of her being an organizer is undisputable as Coilhouse maganizne mentions this fact in one article about WGT

Just to exemplified how this photographer is more than a "mere" photographer but an artist with talents in other artistic areas and also that her fame is not just present in Germany but also, and at least, in USA, Belgium, UK, France and Brazil, there is an article by the german newspapper Volksstimme about her artistic work in the Heinrichshorst Castle ("Schloss Heinrichshorst"), article that also states that "She organizes costume and vampire balls in Belgium, France and Germany, and her reputation reaches as far as the USA. Castle owners ask them, event agencies, costume designers. " (automatic translation of "In Belgien, Frankreich und Deutschland organisiert sie Kostüm- und Vampirbälle, bis in die USA eilt ihr Ruf. Schlossbesitzer fragen sie an, Eventagenturen, Kostümbildner.")

But, maybe more important, are the words of this photographer, in its linkedin profile, were it says that this "leader of the neo-historical scene worldwide with over 10 years of experience in organising high-end extravaganza events, inspiring people from all over the world to live their dreams. (...) Over this decade, her work has influenced many fans, followers, other photographers, and the fashion industry worldwide, who have watched closely how she transforms her ideas into pictures, costumes and events. Viona’s events have inspired people to organise their own, similar events, in countries including France, United Kingdom, Italy, Brazil, USA and Mexico.", so another reason, per own words, to doubt of being "not a well-known person".

So, per above, § 23 (1) No. 1 KUG (or Zeitgeschichte) clearly applies as this is a "Person der Zeitgeschichte" and is in a clear public space and event (and organized by the person depicted), as § 23 (1) No. 4 KUG possibly also applies, as its "distribution or exhibition serves a higher artistic interest"

Also if, indeed, this belgium photographer wants so much to depart so much from when was a gothic photographer (by her own words "when I keep on dragging the past with me"), then why in the long last past of last month did this user added, to the dutch article, the passage "Haar vroege fotografische werk is een duistere en melancholische reactie op de snelle en commercieel gedreven samenleving van de 21e eeuw waar ze niet het gevoel had dat ze er thuishoort. Haar werk is geïnspireerd op de gothic novels, gedichten en schilders van de 19e-eeuwse romantische beweging" (translated from the same text in english on the photographer website in the "Early photographic work" section) where there are mentions that "Her work is inspired by the gothic novels, poems and painters of the 19th. century romantic movement." Tm (talk) 23:48, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To answer you properly it is important that we first establish the facts.
  1. Is Viola Ielegems the photographer here for this image or the model or both ?
  2. Is the claimed author "Motophil" equally such a reknowned person considering that all his other uploads seem to be low resolution images of autombile components ?
  3. Is the WGT held in Germany or in Belgium ?
  4. Where / when was this image first published ?
  5. Is there any specific consent (or release) of the model to publish / licence this image available with WMF ?
  6. Why does Article 8 of the ECHR not apply here to allow the model (even for an inmage made in a public space) to object to the commercial exploitation of her image (in the absence of release), as she is doing now  ?
  7. Are images without commercial reproduction rights acceptable on Commons ?
  8. Did the image not have a personality rights disclaimer precisely for the kind of objection the nominator is raising now ?
  9. Will the EU's Right to be forgotten (if invoked) be enforced by the Commons community or by the WMF ?
NB: The block on En.Wikipedia is under challenge. I have already noted on this website that I am an experienced Mediawiki user on other wikis. SinghIsFxing (talk) 05:05, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SinghIsFxing Your latest (fourth) unblock request had already been declined when you posted that comment. It is not looking good for you.
As far as I know, for personality rights (as opposed to copyright), commercial reproduction rights have never been required on Commons. Hence the separate sections in Commons:Country specific consent requirements for non-commercial and commerical publishing and the {{Personality rights}} template. Brianjd (talk) 12:18, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SinghIsFxing Which of these facts are actually relevant here? Surely the photographer’s notability is not? Brianjd (talk) 12:19, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All the facts I requested are relevant. I observe that Tm did not answer my pointed queries but instead took it down another (emotional appeal) path and is unwilling to even clarify who, in his opinion, the photographer of this image is. Also the image is released as CC-BY-SA-3.0 which includes "Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially". The uploader must establish that he had the consent / release of the model for commercial adaption and reproduction. Regarding my unblock requests at En.Wp, it is proceeding as per local wiki norms and has been escalated to the appellate body where it shall be handled privately as all parties to the dispute desire. The matter is complicated by the fact the alleged puppet master has sought the assistance of a rather nasty group of Hindu nationalists who have threatened WMF's employees in India with physical harm. SinghIsFxing (talk) 00:21, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You may say that you are "an experienced Mediawiki user on other wikis" but the fact is that you only have 54 total edits under an account registered on Dezember 8 2022 on english wikipedia and that you are blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Lord Alan B'stard, one user blocked for "Clearly not here to build an encyclopedia", i.e. harassement of other users and you already four unblocks requests denied. Facts are not "emotional appeal" or claims of emotional appeal.
About who "the photographer of this image is" enlightened by this deletion request and the file description. If you have any doubt, it is an user that only edited commons and de and en wikipedias, and which last edits were, for the german wikipedia in 2011-02-25, only edit was on 2020-05-11 and in commons (before his comment above,is last edit here in Commons was on 2-07-2009. Tm (talk) 01:11, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tm You assume and presume too much .. I said I was an experienced MEDIAWIKI user and have also edited other wikis such as Scholarpedia, LII-Wex and Citizendium, all of which require confirmed identities. There is no question of being a sockpuppet of anyone else. It is what is called a "collateral block" because the ISP at my current location (a huge ISP service) uses shared dynamic IP addresses for mobile services depending on location, and usually thousands of users share the same IP address at any point of time. Any other things like User Agent, local time, screen size, colour pallette etc. captured by Checkuser are easily spoofed and have no evidentiary value outside of wikipedia. Now about "Motophil", what is his real life identity so that his copyright claim for authorship can be confirmed. Does WMF even verify identities before opening user accounts ? .. And so your point was ?? SinghIsFxing (talk) 08:28, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Disagree @Tm: I seriously doubt applicability of § 23 (1) No. 1 KUG (expendable consent for people of historic interest): There will be no history books covering Viona Ielegems’ attendance at said event. § 23 (1) No. 4 KUG (expendable consent if it serves extraordinary artistic interest) could be applicable, yet this is out of scope: Commons is not an art exhibit, but focuses on educational use. § 23 (1) No. 4 KUG requires presentation/distribution within the context of artistic appreciation. ‑‑ Kays (T | C) 12:22, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kai Burghardt Your suggestion that this file is out of scope is ridiculous, since it is in use and the subject is notable (as noted near the start of this discussion). Brianjd (talk) 13:14, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Brianjd: No, for § 23 (1) No. 4 KUG it is required to present the work in the context of artistic appreciation. E. g. display the photograph in an art museum. Commons, however, is not an art exhibit. This is not in COM:SCOPE. The exemption of § 23 (1) No. 4 KUG could not be used to publish the image in a textbook on, say, Victorian era clothing. Hence, potential applicability of § 23 (1) No. 4 KUG is irrelevant for us on Commons. ‑‑ Kays (T | C) 13:20, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kai Burghardt Your original wording was not clear. I understand it better now. But I still think that is wrong: Commons does host notable art, and one could easily imagine that art being used on, say, Wikibooks or Wikinews in the context of artistic appreciation. (This just means that § 23 (1) No. 4 KUG could still be relevant on Commons. It does not mean that § 23 (1) No. 4 KUG is relevant for this file.) Brianjd (talk) 13:28, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Agree @Brianjd: Uh, yes, certainly. (However, §§ 22, 23 KUG are for depictions of people.) ‑‑ Kays (T | C) 13:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kai Burghardt But something can both depict people and be notable art, right? Brianjd (talk) 13:48, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The sugestion that this file is out of scope is utter nonsense as the file is in use in de:Wave-Gotik-Treffen, so Commons:Project_scope#File_in_use_in_another_Wikimedia_project clearly states that a "media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful for an educational purpose(...) if it is in use, that is enough.". There is also 4 articles about this photographer. Enough said about scope.
First, anyone that makes predictions of what history books will cover in the future ("there will be no history books covering Viona Ielegems’ attendance at said event") either does not known what is talking about or is making wild assumptions. Alas, and this in her own words she is a public person, now in my wild assumption, a with great probabilities of being covered by history books.
The fact is that several international media outlets, a basic and fundamental source in the study contemporary history, talk about this photographer, work and art, specifically this victorian picnics shows that these are people and events of events of public relevance and events of contemporary history (Zeitgeschichte)
Also, as she was the organizer of several Viktorianischen Picknick just in Wave-Gotik-Treffen, has inspired others to make the same kind of events in different places like Brazil, or by the very same own words of the depicted person "Viona’s events have inspired people to organise their own, similar events, in countries including France, United Kingdom, Italy, Brazil, USA and Mexico" USA, etc, and by the very same own words of the depicted person is a "leader of the neo-historical scene worldwide" and journalists have said that "her reputation reaches as far as the USA".
There is Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements#Germany that clearly says that there is an exception "in the sphere of Zeitgeschichte (event of public relevance)" and this photographer was in Wave-Gotik-Treffen, a clear event of public relevance and was also the organizer of several yearly Viktorianischen Picknick, specificaly covered by several international media outlets with explicity mention of this photographer, picnics that occured in several yearly Wave-Gotik-Treffen.
So, all above shows that § 23 (1) No. 1 KUG clearly applies and § 23 (1) No. 4 KUGas as decision of 1 BvR 2112/15 by the Bundesverfassungsgericht protects street photography and depiction of people without prior consent to display in the context of a publicly accessible exhibition and this is a clear and cut case of street photography and Commons is a publicly accessible exhibition. Tm (talk) 20:58, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also it should be taken into account the closure as kept in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Viola II - Flickr - SoulStealer.co.uk.jpg, opened with the same arguments and by the same person and event. Tm (talk) 23:04, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tm Will you please clarify who you are referring to as "the photographer" / "this photographer" in your comments. Thanks. SinghIsFxing (talk) 00:27, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See image, see text of news cited, see comments of other users, etc. Tm (talk) 01:13, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The argument summary thus far for the retainers, seems to be that the model is a notable person photographed while participating in a public event which she was involved with in some way as an organiser, so covered under the exception to the German criminal law. That reasoning would only work if the model was shown as part of a wider collection of people participating in the event. Instead what we have here, is a deliberate image crop to focus exclusively on the model, accompanied by the awarding of a licence for commercial exploitaion of the image without the consent of the model by an anonymous photographer (who now also wishes for deletion). If the EU resident nominator is properly advised, she would firstly file a formal request to the data controller of the hosting entity (Wikimedia Foundation) under the EU GDPR regime to demand a statement of all information relating to her which is accessible to persons in the EU. After evaluating the data held, she would file formal requests to the data controller for removal. She has a rather strong case considering the community deletion methods are clearly ineffective and unduly prolonged and controversial. For reference these links may asist her How does the GDPR affect Wikimedia sites and Wikibase instances? and GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) and MediaWiki software and OLG Stuttgart Urteil vom 2.10.2013, 4 U 78/13 and Right to Erasure and Munich Court judgement on Right to Privacy. SinghIsFxing (talk) 01:15, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SinghIsFxing The first two links are useless. The last link contains this line near the start: There exists no claim for injunctive relief against the publication of the Claimant’s birth year in the online lexicon “Wikipedia”. So that doesn’t seem to support your argument either. I haven’t bothered checking the other links. Brianjd (talk) 09:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The last link dealt with the situation where the Claimant had herself placed the date of birth in the public domain. The present case is entirely different where an anonymous papprazzi takes photos without the model's knowledge and first publishes it on Commons falsely assigning commercial reproduction rights which he had no authority to assign. SinghIsFxing (talk) 10:34, 17 December 2022 (UTC).[reply]
The second link establishes that Mediawiki wiki software is not, and apparently cannot be, GDPR compliant. SinghIsFxing (talk) 10:38, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Brianjd Those links were not meant for Commons volunteers, who are blinkered by self serving (one sided) Commons policies. A legal professional dealing with GDPR cases will know how to apply those links for Viola's matter, after determining the appropriate jurisdiction. SinghIsFxing (talk) 10:04, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SinghIsFxing But those links are not meant for that legal professional either, because they have better sources of information and better things to do than to make sense of your comments. So who are those links meant for? Brianjd (talk) 10:08, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
They are meant for Viona to get a sense of what she has to do. As the uploader / author is anonymous, the copyright vests in the publisher WMF, so she should simply bypass this dilatory and unneccessary process (which has no legal sanctity) and make a direct request under GDPR and not waste her time or ours. SinghIsFxing (talk) 10:24, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SinghIsFxing As the uploader / author is anonymous, the copyright vests in the publisher WMF Rubbish. Brianjd (talk) 10:48, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Presumptions about ownership of copyright in anonymous or pseudonymous works. Please see the conclusion at para 5. SinghIsFxing (talk) 13:13, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SinghIsFxing Your comments here, which encourage the subject to take legal action and purportedly assist the subject to do so, are bordering on a legal threat. Pinging @Tuvalkin for their thoughts on this issue. Brianjd (talk) 11:03, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
BrianjdWhy is it taking so long to decide such a simple copyright matter ? OTH, GDPR processes are streamlined and time-bound, and processed very quickly because they are handled by qualified professionals. A GPDR request to WMF is not a legal threat because it is not adverserial but procedural. Also, Think of the victim here. SinghIsFxing (talk) 13:08, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SinghIsFxing It’s not a copyright matter. Brianjd (talk) 13:13, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Brianjd So it's a hosting matter then ? Or is it (ahem) a legal question of invasion of privacy and criminal extortion ? SinghIsFxing (talk) 13:19, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And it turns out they’re not an admin. Pinging @Kai Burghardt, Tm as other substantial contributors to this discussion. Brianjd (talk) 11:05, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Brianjd: I am sorry, why are you pinging me? The discussion seemed to deviate from the actual topic and there were wild interpretations of the law, I kind of became disinterested. ‑‑ Kays (T | C) 11:14, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This DR (in particular, SinghIsFxing’s conduct) has been reported to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Commons:Deletion requests/File:Viona Ielegems at the victorian picnic 2009.jpg. Brianjd (talk) 13:26, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And I have replied to you over there, observing that you are harassing me for opposing your opinion SinghIsFxing (talk) 14:03, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SinghIsFxing Pings don’t work unless accompanied by a fresh signature. (But, as an experienced MediaWiki user, you probably knew that already.) Brianjd (talk) 10:13, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The mediawiki documentation you linked to is ambiguously worded and can be interpreted as only requiring that the comment be signed. SinghIsFxing (talk) 10:22, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SinghIsFxing I guess that’s technically true, but what I said is the more reasonable interpretation; ‘comment’ is not a well-defined concept across edits. (Also, what I said is supported by what I heard elsewhere.) Brianjd (talk) 10:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Those links were not meant for Commons volunteers" - then why you waste our time by posting them? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:23, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete and all of Category:Viona Ielegems too. They are within their rights (German law) to refuse permission to allow such an image to be published. I am unfamiliar with German law to hold an opinion as to whether it is reasonable to withdraw such permission, or to question such permission 13 years after the event and the upload here. But per COM:PRP and simplifying our workload here, and in the absence of any great value to the project in holding this material, if there is any question about any of it, then ditch the whole lot. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:10, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Andy Dingley No great value in holding any media about a subject with articles in four Wikipedias? Brianjd (talk) 00:30, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To us or to them? Andy Dingley (talk) 00:39, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
After all, are they even well-sourced or accurate articles? There's no article at en:WP, the one place with some pretence at sourcing. The Dutch article begins "is a Belgian art photographer" and yet here we have a deletion request on the basis that they're not a photographer, and that it's somehow detrimental to them to have a photo of them holding a camera. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:42, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Andy Dingley Don’t we have a clear policy that we need to resolve these issues on the other projects first, then discuss deletion here? Brianjd (talk) 02:01, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, we don't. This is a permissions issue, more than scope, so that trumps INUSE.
These are images that are legally obtained and with a clear licence from the photographer, but where doubt is now cast on their release from the subject (a requirement, albeit a slightly unclear one, under German law). If this subject has chosen to withdraw their consent for an image years after it was photographed, on slim and subjective grounds, then there is a PRP-significant risk that they will now do that for other images too. It is thus safest for Commons to delete the whole set. Individual wikipedias should be notified of this, and they have their own option to keep or use any images they wish, subject to the relevant rules for each Wikipedia (which do frequently retain images that Commons cannot).
But if Commons cannot reasonably assume that these images are permissible and will remain so, they should go. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:06, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I asked the person to write the details to info-commons@wikimedia.org or sending an official data removal request to privacy@wikimedia.org. With the information we currently have we can not make a proper decision. GPSLeo (talk) 13:21, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is precisely the point. When the "keep" brigade cannot justify the keep and "make the proper decision" then the proper, moral and principled thing to do is the delete this image and all those similar to it. Isn't that ultimately what the PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE is all about ? Will somebody PLEASE close this DR !SinghIsFxing (talk) 14:03, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Closing discussion with no recent contributions. If I understand correctly, there is no legal nor policy requirement to delete, and there is no consensus to delete. Image is in use; person shown has articles about them in multiple Wikipedias so seems a notable public figure. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:The Loves of Mary, Queen of Scots HippFest 2022 (52035848363).jpg

[edit]

Photo credit Tom Duffin Photographer, not from the Flickr account holder A1Cafel (talk) 03:15, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep searching flickr all 83 images in HippFest 2022 - Sunday Afternoon are credited to Mr Duffin I suggest this means that, while they are prepared to allow him credit for these photos, they bought the rights for them from Mr Duffin. Sorry A1Cafel, do you think it is possible you are being excessively suspicious? Flickr is going to contain some "works for hire". Geo Swan (talk) 03:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Geo Swan They did more than credit him, at least in this file. The EXIF data mentions him five times: as the author, as the copyright holder, in the credit line, in the image title, and in the contact information.
    But if he really did sell 83 images of this event, presumably he would be happy to send a message to VRT to clear this up. Brianjd (talk) 10:57, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I sent the following flicrkmail today. Given flickr contributors are intermittent, please allow a grace period for their response. Geo Swan (talk) 15:33, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I sent the following flicrkmail today:
Clarification please - who is Tom Duffin, and what is his relationship to Falkirk Leisure and Culture?
See [5]
If Mr Duffin is an employeed of Falkirk Leisure and Culture, and his employment contract says photos he takes, for work, become the property of Falkirk Leisure and Culture, or he is a freelancer, who explicitly sold the rights to his images to Falkirk Leisure and Culture, then Falkirk Leisure and Culture can release the images under a creative commons license.
What if Falkirk Leisure and Culture has no formal relationship with Mr Duffein?
On the internet people routinely republish other people's images without seeking permission, or formally acknowledging having done so.
Legally, those republshments are all copyright violations, which could trigger a lawsuit.
This becomes a problem for other people, who see a creative commons license, trust that the license is valid, and republish the image themselves, and so become a party to a copyright violation themselves, when they would never knowingly do so.
Thanks!

Deleted: per nomination, no clarification if author/copyright holder has agreed to free license after 3 months. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:48, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]


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.

File:Kci 0939 24832568987 o.jpg

[edit]

Files was removed from Flickr, unknown copyright status A1Cafel (talk) 03:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep correct link is https://www.flickr.com/photos/kurmanphotos/24832568987/in/album-72157668491482629/ There was a missing digit in the link. Image is still on Flickr SecretName101 (talk) 14:06, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SecretName101 After you fixed the link, the review bot came back with a new problem: the Flickr uploader is on the bad authors list. Brianjd (talk) 11:00, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. But bad authors can be put on the list for some of their uploads. A bad author can still make a legit upload. And it very much seems that they are the copyright holder of the photo. Bad authors simply require individual scrutiny of their photos. SecretName101 (talk) 03:27, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SecretName101 So what happens now? Is an image reviewer going to change the license review tag (assuming they agree with you)? Brianjd (talk) 06:06, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: From unreliable "bad user" Flickr uploader; unused. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:51, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]


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.

File:Barak Ali Barak Al Sheetan.png

[edit]

possible copyvio taken from https://www.cmgs.gov.kw/cmgs/cms_images/m_formation/1666017238.jpg -- https://www.cmgs.gov.kw/CurrentMinisterialFormation Mateus2019 (talk) 08:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:52, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

WWE DX logos

[edit]

given Ellywa said at COM:DRV#File:The Rings of Power.png, it looks for me that the DX team of WWE has logo(s) with fairly complex strokes which may be considered as copyrightable artwork(s) instead of {{PD-textlogo}}, unless for evidences Schlimmperator is just the authenticated author of WWE, the actual permissions from WWE should be given --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 08:57, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, also if copyrightable no indication that the uploader is the actual author and copyright holder as claimed. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Attitude era text logo.jpg

[edit]

given Ellywa said at COM:DRV#File:The Rings of Power.png, it looks for me that the Attitude era of WWE has logo(s) with fairly complex strokes which may be considered as copyrightable artwork(s) instead of {{PD-textlogo}}, unless for evidences Islam90 is just the authenticated author of WWE, the actual permissions from WWE should be given Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:03, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: False license, unused. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files in Category:Milorad Dodik in 2022

[edit]

Initially tagged as "no permission". Uploader removed the tag with the edit summary, "Added permission. It can be seen at the bottom of the webpage". The copyright statement at the source page translates to "All rights reserved. Media Center. Any copying of site content without prior approval is prohibited." The user added this link, but it's an archive link that doesn't include the listed photos and makes no mention of a Creative Commons license, just an instruction to link back when republishing photos.

Adeletron 3030 (talk) 12:06, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment There were several discussions about images from mc.rs website (example: Commons:Volunteer_Response_Team/Noticeboard/archive/2020#ticket:2012011710005331 and Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Vacant0), but situation with permission from 2012 on newly uploaded images from same website is still not clear whether they can be uploaded or not. --Smooth O (talk) 09:20, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per above; unclear license status. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:58, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Antônio Filipe Camarão.png

[edit]

Useless + not used anywhere. RodRabelo7 (talk) 12:36, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • To be kept, it doesn't have to be the most useful in scope: that would be a COM:VIC argument. It merely has to be reasonably imaginably useful. Therefore, I would tend to support keeping this file. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ikan Kekek Presumably, people could use DALL-E (or other AIs) to create any number of images depicting this individual and upload them to Commons; presumably, the community would try to draw the line somewhere. I am suggesting that, if we must draw the line somewhere, this might be a good place to draw it. Brianjd (talk) 10:57, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It was created using DALL-E based on the original image. I first created it to use on a article I was writing about some letters Camarão wrote in 1645, but I later gave up on this purpose because I found a better photo on public domain. This image has absolutely no historical value. RodRabelo7 (talk) 04:44, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, the uploader claimed that this file was created using DALL-E, which is why I mentioned DALL-E above. This file is similar to the portrait it is based on, with the subject mostly dressed the same way, but with the pose significantly changed and a signature(?) added.
Also, I just noticed that the nominator is also the uploader. Although the file is outside the timeframe for speedy deletion, this strengthens the argument for deletion. Brianjd (talk) 04:00, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per uploader request and above discussion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:59, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]


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.

File:Antônio Filipe Camarão — recortado.png

[edit]

Useless + not used anywhere. RodRabelo7 (talk) 12:38, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Antônio Filipe Camarão.png. Brianjd (talk) 11:47, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per uploader request. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:59, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]


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.

File:Léon Jouinot-Gambetta.jpg

[edit]

Not "own work" of the uploader. The true source and photographer must be indicated.

Pas {{Own}} de l'uploader. La véritable source et le photographe doivent être indiqués. --Animalparty (talk) 19:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:00, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Newlogo3.png

[edit]

I fund that file on meta:Logo suggestions, and the name was so ambigous that I've renamed that file, thus created this unneeded file redirect John123521 (talk) 13:39, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Achim55 (talk) 22:15, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

WWE nWo logos

[edit]

given Ellywa said at COM:DRV#File:The Rings of Power.png, it looks for me that the nWo team of WWE has logo(s) with fairly complex strokes which may be considered as copyrightable artwork(s) instead of {{PD-textlogo}}, probably the actual permissions from WWE should be given --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Doesn't meet the threshold of originality under US law. oknazevad (talk) 11:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The Rings of Power logo that Liuxinyu970226 is citing contains highly complex "Elven runes" within it's design, and I believe for that reason it is considered well beyond the threshold of originality. This logo (the nWo logo) contains nowhere near the same complexity, in fact, there is no complexity to this logo at all. Let us also keep in mind that File:Cyberpunk 2077 logo.svg was denied copyright registration by the Review Board of the U.S. Copyright Office, and that logo would be more "complex" than this one. CeltBrowne (talk) 12:38, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep not complex enough to meet criteria for deletion.16:59, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Kept: per discussion. ✗plicit 00:35, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Viona Ielegems at the 8th Gala Nocturna (1).jpg

[edit]

This is me and my husband. We don't want this picture to be on the internet. Thanks for your understanding. Viona.ielegems (talk) 10:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep per my comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Viona Ielegems at the victorian picnic 2009.jpg. Brianjd (talk) 15:56, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Consent by acquiescence. I understand you co-organized this event, the 8th Gala Nocturna, and evidently posed for the picture, so you did want publicity, right? ‑‑ Kays (T | C) 16:00, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Clearly posed photo by a person with wikipedia articles in different 4 languages and the organizer of the 8th Gala Nocturna and, per my comments Commons:Deletion requests/File:Viona Ielegems at the victorian picnic 2009.jpg this person is clearly a public figure, or by her own words she is a "leader of the neo-historical scene worldwide with over 10 years of experience in organising high-end extravaganza events, inspiring people from all over the world to live their dreams (...) Over this decade, her work has influenced many fans, followers, other photographers, and the fashion industry worldwide, who have watched closely how she transforms her ideas into pictures, costumes and events. Viona’s events have inspired people to organise their own, similar events, in countries including France, United Kingdom, Italy, Brazil, USA and Mexico.". Tm (talk) 21:05, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also it should be taken into account the closure as kept in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Viola II - Flickr - SoulStealer.co.uk.jpg, opened with the same arguments and by the same person. Tm (talk) 23:04, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All discussions about this subject are now a mess, and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Viola II - Flickr - SoulStealer.co.uk.jpg is no exception; a new DR was recently opened there. Brianjd (talk) 07:03, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per discussion and outcome at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Viona Ielegems at the victorian picnic 2009.jpg. --IronGargoyle (talk) 22:08, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Ziegelstraße 5-9, Berlin-Mitte (4802767180).jpg

[edit]

No building of special importance. Considering that large parts of the picture are covered with leaves and thus largely obscure the building, I do not consider the picture useful and therefore propose its deletion. Lukas Beck (talk) 09:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per de:Liste der Kulturdenkmale in Berlin-Mitte/Spandauer Vorstadt, it's a listed monument, so I disagree with the assessment that this is "no building of special importance". --Rosenzweig τ 20:51, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Solingen, Rathland 30.jpg

[edit]

Bitte löschen! 2001:9E8:4367:B400:84BB:1501:B8FF:9AE3 16:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Warum? Siehe auch de:Recht am Bild der eigenen Sache. --Achim55 (talk) 18:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ohne Begründung des Löschantrags existiert keinerlei Veranlassung, das Bild zu löschen. Falls das Haus in ein, zwei Jahren fertig saniert sein sollte, kann man ja ein hübscheres Foto dieses denkmalgeschützten Gebäudes hochladen. Das Denkmalschutzgesetz NRW fordert, dass ein Baudenkmal für die Öffentlichkeit sichtbar sein sollte. --Im Fokus (talk) 19:32, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Das Foto ist auch bei späterem Vorliegen einer Aufnahme des renovierten Objekts behaltenswert, da es einen Vorher-Nachher-Vergleich ermöglichen wird.
Ich habe aber das von mir erstellte Bild aus der Liste der Baudenkmäler in Solingen-Gräfrath in der Hoffnung auf eine restaurierte(re) Ansicht im nächsten Jahr b.a.w. wieder heraus genommen. Damit dürfte die Gefahr der zufälligen Entdeckung des Objekts im Internet durch Menschen mit unlauteren Absichten größtenteils gebannt sein. Soweit mir bekannt steht eine solche Hofschaft wie Rathland übrigens eher nicht im Fokus von Einbrecherbanden, da die informelle Vernetzung der Bewohner hoch ist (man passt gegenseitig auf einander auf) und die Fluchtwege stark eingeschränkt sind (eine einzige schmale Zu- und Abfahrt). Solange das Haus noch baulich saniert wird, gibt es im Haus vermutlich kein kleinformatiges Diebesgut wie Geld, Schmuck oder hochwertige Elektronik, für den Abtransport teurer Baumaterialien aber wäre wohl ein größeres Fahrzeug nötig, für das die bestehende Verkehrsinfrastruktur ein wiederum noch größeres Problem darstellen würde. --Im Fokus (talk) 23:37, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Der reine Vorher-Nachher-Vergleich ist auch auf Grundlage von älteren Fotos des Hauses möglich, die bereits vor Beginn der Sanierung gemacht wurden und im Internet veröffentlicht sind.
Die Entdeckung des Hauses und der Baustelle durch Menschen mit unlauteren Absichten ist keineswegs gebannt, da man das Bild durch einfaches Googeln der Adresse finden kann. Die Werte, die auf dem Bild zu sehen sind (Eichenholzstapel, Gerüst, Leitern usw.) sind durchaus ein Anziehungspunkt für die oben genannte Personengruppe. Die Menge und Größe der gelagerten Gegenstände machen ein allabendliches Wegräumen unmöglich, ebenso können wir aufgrund der engen baulichen Gegebenheiten keine Zäune ziehen, zumal das auch erstmal von der Denkmalbehörde genehmigt werden müsste.
Wir haben seit Beginn der Pandemie ein massives Problem mit Hausfriedensbruch, Vandalismus und Diebstahl, ansonsten würde ich mir nicht die Mühe machen Sie zur Löschung des Bildes aufzufordern!
Zu Ihren Annahmen bzgl. der Wohnsituation in der Hofschaft:
Haus Nr. 30 wird trotz Sanierung von uns bewohnt, weiter werde ich auf unsere wohnlichen Umstände und Besitztümer nicht eingehen, da es unsere Persönlichkeitsrechte tangiert.
Trotz der engen Zufahrt passen hier Sprinter (3,5t) und auch kleine LKW problemlos durch (Wie hätten wir sonst das Baumaterial hierher bekommen sollen und wie sollte uns das Flüssiggas zum Heizen geliefert werden?).
Und letztlich bekommen auch sehr aufmerksame Nachbarn nicht alles mit, auch nicht wenn mit großem Fahrzeug eingeladen wird.
Wie ich Ihnen angeboten habe, kann gerne nach Abschluss der Baumaßnahmen ein neues Bild vom Haus gemacht werden, ohne die Wertgenstände im Bild.
Es hat eben auch etwas mit Respekt und Anstand zu tun, der Bitte von Privatpersonen zu entsprechen ein Bild zu löschen, das sie als ein Sicherheitsrisiko für sich selbst und ihre Familie betrachten. Da reicht das bloße Entfernen aus einem Verzeichnis („Liste der Baudenkmäler Solingen-Gräfrath“) nicht. Dem sollte auch nicht der Wunsch oder das Recht entgegenstehen, dass jedes Denkmal laut Denkmalgesetz der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich sein muss. Ohne Leute wie uns gäbe es so manches Denkmal nicht mehr.
Für persönliche Rückfragen stehen wir im Übrigen zur Verfügung, Sie wissen ja wo wir wohnen. 2001:9E8:434A:F700:EC07:5FE6:C60D:F005 17:36, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, aber ich konnte im Internet keine alten Aufnahmen des Hauses finden, auf denen es nicht nur halb verdeckt im äußersten Hintergrund der Straße zu sehen wäre. Falls es ein Foto des Hauses im Zustand vor Beginn der Sanierungsmaßnahmen geben sollte, so kann es natürlich nur mit Einwilligung des Rechteinhabers von einer anderen Netz-Seite hierher transponiert werden. Falls Sie als Eigentümerin ein altes Bild Ihres Eigentums haben sollten, sind Sie herzlich eingeladen, dieses hier hochzuladen.
Ich kann Ihre Sorgen zwar tendenziell verstehen, wundere mich aber doch über einige Ihrer Aussagen. So ist der Einbruchsdiebstahl seit Beginn der Pandemie auch im Bergischen Land signifikant zurückgegangen, was nicht weiter erstaunt, da Einbruch und Diebstahl eben deutlich schwieriger werden, wenn viele Menschen im Homeoffice arbeiten. Dass Sie sogar im Haus wohnen, macht doch Diebstähle und sonstige Vergehen deutlich schwieriger als bei einem unbewohnten Objekt. Vandalismus ist sicher ärgerlich, aber Vandalen sind keine organisierte Diebesbande mit Lkw und suchen sich wohl nicht vorher im Internet gezielt Objekte aus, sondern handeln (oft unter Alkohol- oder sonstigem Dogeneinfluss) meist spontan. Auch Ihre Angst vor einem Gerüstdiebstahl kann ich kaum nachvollziehen. Bis so ein Gerüst abgebaut ist, das dauert schon recht lange und macht auch ziemlich Lärm, da müssten sich die Diebe schon verdammt sicher sein, ungestört zu bleiben, was ich aufgrund der engen Nachbarschaft bei Ihnen als nicht gegeben ansehe. Beim Holz haben Sie einen Punkt. Ich bin kein Fachmann und habe nicht gesehen, dass es Eiche ist, aber schon billigere Holzarten sind ja stark im Preis gestiegen. Keine Frage, dass dies für Diebe interessant ist. Ich habe übrigens nicht behauptet, dass hier kein größeres Fahrzeug durchkommt (und Sie entsprechend beliefern kann), aber nach allem, was man medial so mitbekommt, suchen Diebe vor allem schnelle Rückzugs- und Fluchtmöglichkeiten. Da rangiert Ihre Straße als schmale, leicht zu blockierende Sackgasse wohl wirklich weit hinten, schon für Pkw, erst recht für Lkw.
Fazit: wenn bei Ihnen in letzter Zeit verstärkt gestohlen wurde, dann kann das ja nicht an meinem erst seit kurzem hochgeladenen Foto liegen. So ein Foto könnte zwar als Absicherung der ausbaldowerten Gelegenheit dienen, aber ins Blaue hinein wird wohl keine Diebesbande Adresse für Adresse im Internet nach verwertbaren Fotos suchen, das wäre viel zu ineffektiv. Wenn sich die Kriminellen auf Denkmäler spezialisiert haben sollten (wobei da Villen interessanter sein dürften), dann könnten sie sich über die Wikipedia-Listen der Baudenkmäler einen ersten Überblick verschaffen. Das war jedenfalls meine Überlegung bei der Entfernuing des Fotos aus der Liste und der Einschätzung, dass die größte Gefahr damit gebannt sei. (Hundertprozentige Sicherheit gibt es bekanntlich nur selten).
Excusez-moi Madame, aber es fehlt mir nicht an Respekt und Anstand, wenn ich Ihrer Aufforderung nicht zugestimmt habe. Ich bezweifle nicht die von Ihnen dargelegten Probleme mit grassierender (Klein)kriminalität, bestreite aber aus den dargelegten Gründen, dass diese durch Fotos wie meines ausgelöst wird. Eine persönliche Rückfrage dürfte nicht notwendig sein. Da ich nicht in Solingen wohne, wäre mir auch die Anreise in Ihr abgelegenes Idyll zu umständlich, da bitte ich um Verständnis. Ich hoffe, Sie können damit leben, dass ich nun eine Löschung befürworte, mir aber vorbehalte, im nächsten Sommer/Herbst von meinem Recht der Panoramafreiheit erneuten Gebrauch zu machen und ein neues Foto mit dann hoffentlich fehlendem Gerüst und Materialhaufen zu machen. Natürlich sind Sie eingeladen, sobald es Ihnen opportun erscheint, ein Foto des restaurierten Schmuckstücks hochzuladen und in die Baudenkmälerliste einzutragen. Das minimiert die Gefahr, dass weitere von Ihnen unerwünschte Fotos im Netz landen (es gab schon mal einen Löschantrag wegen der Sichtbarkeit einer Gartensitzecke ohne Personen mit ordentlich aufgeräumter handelsüblicher Möblierung, die könnte man selbst dann vorher entfernen).
 Delete by courtesy --Im Fokus (talk) 23:45, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Eine ältere Aufnahme des Hauses aus Zeiten des Vorbesitzers findet man beispielsweise hier, jedoch ohne volle Adressangabe:
https://community.fachwerk.de/index.cfm/ly/1/0/image/a/showPicture/41956$.cfm
Ihre Idee, dass wir uns selbst um die entsprechenden Aufnahmen kümmern und hochladen, ist fantastisch und wird von uns demnächst umgesetzt.
Sie können Ihr Recht auf Panoramafreiheit ausüben wie Sie möchten! Achten Sie aber beim nächsten Mal darauf, dass Sie nicht mehr unser Grundstück betreten, wie auf Bild von Haus Nr. 30 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Solingen,_Rathland_30,_Nordgiebel.jpg zu sehen ist, da stehen Sie nämlich offensichtlich in unserem Carport (das Dach ist oben rechts in der Ecke zu sehen).
Bezüglich der Gerüste geht es nicht um Diebstahl, sondern um unbefugtes Betreten/Hausfriedensbruch trotz üblicher Sicherheitsmaßnahmen (Abbau aller Zugänge und Leitern etc.).
Das von Ihnen gezogene Fazit auch glücklicherweise nicht korrekt. Ich habe nie gemeint, dass Ihre Fotos für unsere Probleme ursächlich verantwortlich wären – wir wollen aber auch nicht, dass durch unglückliche Fotos (wo eben nicht nur die Hausfassade zu sehen ist, sondern auch andere Dinge) oder weitere Veröffentlichungen noch mehr Schaden angerichtet wird als sowieso schon entstanden ist.
Ich weiß allerdings nicht, welches Foto mit Garten-bzw. Sitzecke Sie meinen. Wir haben keine Sitzecken, die von der Straße aus einzusehen sind, unsere Nachbarn jedoch schon. Ebenso habe ich auch vorher noch nie eine Löschung auf Wikipedia beantragt. Insofern gehe ich von einer Verwechslung aus.
Schade, dass Sie nicht zum persönlichen Dialog bereit sind! Vielleicht überlegen Sie es sich doch nochmal und sprechen uns das nächste Mal an, wenn Sie in der Nähe sind und ein Foto machen möchten.
Bis dahin: à bientôt Monsieur und alles Gute! 2001:9E8:4342:2D00:473:614E:7055:D0C5 14:44, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ältere Ansicht des Hauses: https://www.fachwerk.de/fachwerkhaus/wissen/lohnt-sich-eine-sanierung-261475.html
(Link-Korrektur) 2001:9E8:4342:2D00:473:614E:7055:D0C5 19:07, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Immer wieder entstehen Missverständnisse: das Sitzecken-Beispiel sollte nur einen recht krassen Fall realiter gestellter Löschanträge illustrieren, die man eben mit geeigneten eigenen Fotos vermeiden kann. Ich bin auch durchaus zu einem persönlichen Gespräch bereit, wenn ich mal wieder in der Gegend fotografieren sollte. Ich habe nur um Verständnis gebeten, dass ich nicht für die laufende Diskussion extra nach Solingen kommen werde, da ich Ihre obige Einlassung, ich wisse, wo Sie wohnen, so interpretiert hatte. Dass Ihnen Schaden entstanden ist, tut mir leid, für Ihre weitere Renovierung wünsche ich Ihnen viel Erfolg. Mich freut es prinzipiell, wenn solche alten Denkmäler erhalten werden - und nicht zuletzt sieht nach Abschluss der Arbeiten auch das Foto für die Wiki-Liste besser aus.
Abschließend eine kurze Anmerkung zur Klarstellung des weiteren Prozederes (das Sie vielleicht kennen): da man mit dem Hochladen seiner Fotos die Rechte daran großteils abgibt, kann ich das Foto nicht zurückziehen, obschon ich letztendlich für eine Löschung gestimmt habe. Über die Löschung entscheidet aber die Gemeinschaft der WikiCommons User. Alles Gute --Im Fokus (talk) 09:07, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per GPSLeo. --Rosenzweig τ 20:55, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]


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.

File:Alerce3.jpeg

[edit]

Source is from the Ministry of Interior, not the Presidency of Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 17:09, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: no evidence of free license on https://web.archive.org/web/20160304124846/http://mininterior.gov.ar/prensa/prensa.php?i=4510. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:48, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Essere Animali logo.png

[edit]

Licence from the website https://www.essereanimali.org/ CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 - see this page in italian language Bradipo Lento (talk) 09:54, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Probably a professor of COM:TOO Italy should explain whether acceptable or not, since that link only contains FC logos. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:00, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, not in use, logo out of COM:SCOPE per IronGargoyle. --Ellywa (talk) 17:58, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Jean Grémion (1942-2019).jpg

[edit]

Unlikely claim of authorship — Racconish 💬 13:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Is it really unlikely? From what I gather, the uploader is a French writer and film director born in 1943. So he was already around in 1963 and perhaps already active in the field of cinema and theater. --Rosenzweig τ 17:07, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by PODZO DI BORGO perhaps nominator did not look at the earlier request, where uploader commented and explained he is author of old photos. --Ellywa (talk) 19:34, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:The New Electric Ballroom.webm

[edit]

And:

This video was posted on the YouTube channel of Richard Alexander. It's a very small personal YouTube channel that only has 17 subscribers and 10 uploads. There is no official link to either Het Nationaal Theater or the play's creators. This looks like license washing --Vera (talk) 13:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is the video channel of Richard Janssen, the content creator, according to the about page: https://www.youtube.com/user/anmujorju/about --Hannolans (talk) 13:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's really insufficient proof that this is his YouTube account. He's also not likely to be the sole owner of the copyright of a trailer that was created for a production of Het Nationaal Theater. Vera (talk) 14:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. In addition, music and text might be copyrighted by others. --Ellywa (talk) 19:40, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

File:Zastava Višića.jpg

[edit]

Village Višići in Čapljina municipality has no flag. Ma▀▄Ga 15:32, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, of no educational use, therefore out of COM:SCOPE. Currently not in use on the projects. --Ellywa (talk) 19:41, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Files uploaded by Banyanhyd (talk · contribs)

[edit]

These are all promotional images available on the Internet for quite some time:

The uploader provides much higher resolution images, which are probably the source images, most likely owned by the institute and provided to the media. Permission to use or clarification about ownership should be provided.

Muhandes (talk) 17:57, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Two of these images showed another name of the author in the EXIF data. So these appear not made by the uploader and VRT permission would be required. --Ellywa (talk) 19:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/10/20&oldid=736956509"