Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2022/11/19
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![52 File:Указ Президента Туркменистана о присвоении тов. Мамедову Г.Д. почетного звания "Заслуженный артист Туркменистана".jpg](#File:Указ_Президента_Туркменистана_о_присвоении_тов._Мамедову_Г.Д._почетного_звания_"Заслуженный_артист_Туркменистана".jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(11573011963).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![144 File:Carátula Single "Cielo Fuego".jpg](#File:Carátula_Single_"Cielo_Fuego".jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_location_map_(1917_highlighited).svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Accidental upload (meant to upload locally to Wikipedia). In the United Kingdom, most signatures are not in the public domain due to a lower threshold of originality. ThatRandomGuy1 (talk) 00:36, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as rquested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 05:15, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bible-Torah-Kabbalah-Love-Light-World-Peace-Spirituality-Gifts-English-Hebrew-Art (talk · contribs)
[edit]out of scope and unlikely own work
- File:Poster-CC0-05-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-Hebrew-140Cm-Face.png
- File:Poster-CC0-02-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-English-100Cm-Noah.png
- File:Poster-CC0-01-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-English-100Cm-Genesis.png
- File:Poster-CC0-04-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-English-100Cm-Moses.png
- File:Poster-CC0-00-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-English-211Cm-Good.png
- File:Poster-CC0-06-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-Hebrew-140Cm-Perspective.png
- File:Poster-CC0-00-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-Hebrew-211Cm-Good.png
- File:Poster-CC0-03-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-Hebrew-100Cm-Abraham.png
- File:Poster-CC0-03-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-English-100Cm-Abraham.png
- File:Poster-CC0-02-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-Hebrew-100Cm-Noah.png
- File:Poster-CC0-01-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-Hebrew-100Cm-Genesis.png
- File:Poster-CC0-06-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-English-140Cm-Perspective.png
- File:Poster-CC0-05-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-English-140Cm-Face.png
- File:Poster-CC0-04-Bible-kabbalah-Torah-love-food-light-work-happy-health-god-gift-magic-universal-World-spirituality-soul-israel-jerusalem-comics-Joy-Hebrew-100Cm-Moses.png
GPSLeo (talk) 09:09, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Hey!
* We, my wife and I are 2 comics book artists pensioners, not religious. Not affiliated with any religion. We believe in: Joy, love, wisdom, kindness, universal international interfaith world spirituality love, the unity of humanity together, with big love! * * 2 Question: * How do we replace this painting to the new version that we improved yesterday? * What is the maximum size of an image that can be uploaded to: commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons ? ♥ ❤😀 with love Simcha & Hila ♥ ❤😀
- h4uh Bible Kabbalah Torah Happy Joy love wisdom kindness world peace truth lectures (talk) 10:54, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- As you write this is your personal art project. We do not host personal art projects on Commons. And please do not include your long political message in every singe post. --GPSLeo (talk) 11:32, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 13:32, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Fantasy maps by AndrewJacksonn123
[edit]- File:2024 Arizona President.png
- File:2024 Arkansas President.png
- File:2024 California President.png
- File:2024 Colorado President.png
- File:2024 Connecticut President.png
- File:2024 Georgia President.png
- File:2024 Hawaii President.png
- File:2024 Illinois President.png
- File:2024 Iowa.png
- File:2024 Louisiana President.png
- File:2024 Maine President.png
- File:2024 Maryland President.png
- File:2024 Massachusetts President.png
- File:2024 Michigan Election.png
- File:2024 Minnesota Election Pres.png
- File:2024 Mississippi President.png
- File:2024 Missouri President.png
- File:2024 Montana President.png
- File:2024 Nevada Election.png
- File:2024 New Hampshire President.png
- File:2024 New Jersey President.png
- File:2024 North Carolina.png
- File:2024 Pennsylvania Election.png
- File:2024 Virgnina.png
- File:2024 Wisconsin.png
- File:Ohio 2024.png
Similar maps have already been deleted multiple times. See the user page of the uploader. Fantasy maps of the future, no educational value. --Cryptic-waveform (talk) 02:09, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- See Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by AndrewJacksonn123 for some previous deletion requests. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 02:16, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 14:06, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
There is already a Category:Tributaries of the Glems, which was meant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Silvicola (talk • contribs) 07:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 15:52, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Qatar doesn't have freedom of panorama, nor do I believe that this is the user's own work. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:55, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, copyvio. --Achim55 (talk) 18:29, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
This item is not the user's own work, and even if it was, there is no freedom of panorama in Qatar, so copyright is owned by Qatar. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:06, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, copyvio. --Achim55 (talk) 18:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
This item is not the user's own work, and even if it was, there is no freedom of panorama in Qatar, so copyright is owned by Qatar. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:07, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, copyvio. --Achim55 (talk) 18:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Kurmanbek as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: This file is not uploader's work Kurmanbek (talk) 19:44, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: Obviously copyvio, no need to wait for 7 days. Next time, please request speedy deletion. --Kadı Message 20:25, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Kurmanbek as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: This file is taken from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aqmirrf6rmY Kurmanbek (talk) 19:46, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: Obviously copyvio, no need to wait for 7 days. Next time, please request speedy deletion. --Kadı Message 20:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Kurmanbek as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: This file is taken from: https://www.sozcu.com.tr/2021/gundem/iki-liderden-erdogana-merkez-bankasi-rezervleri-yaniti-damadi-olmasa-hesap-soracagi-bir-konu-6308398/ Kurmanbek (talk) 19:48, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: Obviously copyvio, no need to wait for 7 days. Next time, please request speedy deletion. --Kadı Message 20:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Kurmanbek as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: This photo hasn't any free license and not uploader's photo: https://www.rudaw.net/turkish/middleeast/turkey/01012021 Kurmanbek (talk) 19:50, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: Obviously copyvio, no need to wait for 7 days. Next time, please request speedy deletion. --Kadı Message 20:24, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
I think this photo isn't uploader's work. Its so blurry and hasn't any metadata Kurmanbek (talk) 19:51, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: Obviously copyvio, no need to wait for 7 days. Next time, please request speedy deletion. --Kadı Message 20:26, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
I think this photo isn't uploader's work. Its so blurry and hasn't any metadata Kurmanbek (talk) 19:53, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: Obviously copyvio, no need to wait for 7 days. Next time, please request speedy deletion. --Kadı Message 20:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
The file was published after January 2019, the license terms are not capable on Commons A1Cafel (talk) 02:36, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 08:52, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
this is not a personality into Muhammadnijamuddin (talk) 10:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. — D Y O L F 77[Talk] 08:00, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
not able Work Muhammadnijamuddin (talk) 10:37, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- please explain, I can see the image what is the problem. Gnangarra 10:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Keep, usable as a photo of people being served at a bar, no valid reason for deletion. Belbury (talk) 19:41, 19 November 2022 (UTC)- Keep This is part of a set of photos of a notable conference. — Sam Wilson ( Talk • Contribs ) … 01:31, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --VIGNERON (talk) 09:09, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Creator's request Giray Altay (talk) 11:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 10:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Dikshita Bairagi (talk) 14:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uplaoder shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 10:32, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Mentxuwiki (talk) 18:31, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 10:33, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Image en doublon Loïc432 (talk) 23:55, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 10:38, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Image non pertinente Loïc432 (talk) 10:52, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. No clear reason for deletion. Image is in use. IronGargoyle (talk) 03:24, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Krd 17:40, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Image en doublon Loïc432 (talk) 23:55, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 10:39, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Image non pertinente Loïc432 (talk) 10:51, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. No clear reason for deletion. Image is in use. IronGargoyle (talk) 03:21, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Krd 17:40, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Ceci est une image de moi que je souhaite supprimer immédiatement Margauxherlin (talk) 08:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep: Apparently a legitimate request, but licences are not revokable, especially not after 10 years. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 08:47, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin I agree, but is the uploader the copyright holder to begin with? The uploader claims to be the subject, but the subject is usually not the copyright holder. Brianjd (talk) 12:15, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- The model (subject) and the photographer (copyright holder) are often the same when the photograph in question is a selfie (photographic self-portrait), regardless of whether the camera is hand-held or attached to a tripod or something like that. Is it the case of this file? For 10 years we presumed it was, and that’s not what is being challenged in this discussion… -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 13:34, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin I agree, but is the uploader the copyright holder to begin with? The uploader claims to be the subject, but the subject is usually not the copyright holder. Brianjd (talk) 12:15, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Comment: Considering that the uploader is the same as the deletion requester and presuming that the motivation for this DR is something in the curation of this photo in Commons that can be fixed, well — let’s fix it. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 08:47, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin How can we fix it if we don’t even know what it is? What is curation of this photo in Commons supposed to mean? Brianjd (talk) 12:06, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Look at the file history: @Margauxherlin: removed one category (eye color), yet kept the others (pose, subject etc). I read that as willingness to correct misinformation about this photo, not the usual attempt at «make it all go away» we often see in this kind of deletion requests (the o.p. text notwithstanding).
- It’s not negotiable the fact that this file was irrevocably licenced, but if the discomfort it causes to the model can be in any way minimized, then let’s do it. The curation details I mentioned are things like filename, description, and categorization.
- -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 13:28, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- I can’t explain the removal of just one category, but I note that the uploader also requested deletion at frwiki. Brianjd (talk) 14:00, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, it’s a case of «make it all go away», sadly. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:52, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin How can we fix it if we don’t even know what it is? What is curation of this photo in Commons supposed to mean? Brianjd (talk) 12:06, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- In use at pl:Balejaż, pl:Wikipedysta:MalarzBOT/commons and wikidata:Q17257591. Brianjd (talk) 12:13, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- And, for what it’s worth, User:Tuvalkin/Favorites. Brianjd (talk) 12:15, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- That’s one use that I would immediately make go away if it’s part of the problem. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 13:17, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin Fine, but what we really need is answers to the questions I posted above. Brianjd (talk) 13:19, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- That’s one use that I would immediately make go away if it’s part of the problem. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 13:17, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- And, for what it’s worth, User:Tuvalkin/Favorites. Brianjd (talk) 12:15, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Licenses are irrevocable, in particular when this image was uploaded by the same user that now requests its deletion and image has 10 years of age since upload. Also in use in pl:Balejaż and wikidata:Q17257591 item. Tm (talk) 18:27, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: I removed this photo from pl:Balejaż. Gytha (talk) 11:23, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: She has been trying more removals, see this edit and these abuse logs. Pinging @Elcobbola, Túrelio as Admins already aware of some of her shenanigans as Margauxherlin. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:53, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete : The point is not about any copyright infringment. The person was underage when she uploaded the photo, and now regrets. As a VRTS member, I am in touch with her: I have checked her identity, and that she was under 18 when she updated the pic. Anyway, the file is not used on any WP. For information : Ticket #2022112310009985 JohnNewton8 (talk) 17:07, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- If you want this ticket to be considered for a Commons process, it will need to be moved to a Commons queue. Эlcobbola talk 17:55, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- @JohnNewton8: What queue is it in, and why? I can't see it. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 10:47, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Jeff it's in info-fr (she is French, and this queue deals in French with all Wikimedia projects related topics, except permissions & oversight obviously). I have checked her identity to prevent any identity theft. JohnNewton8 (talk) 11:03, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: 1) Margaux Herlin is the subject (copyright initially vests with the photographer, not the subject) and I, frankly, do not believe her that this was on a timer (the angle, framing, etc. only suggest operation of the camera by a human). Notwithstanding that minors also generally lack the legal capacity to license intellectual proprieties, this seems a COM:PRP issue; and 2) COM:SCOPE applies to files legitimately in use. This is an unremarkable image of a non-notable person uploaded for a twice-deleted vanity article (fr:Margaux herlin). The existence of a wikidata entry, and the image's use therein, is the result of mere mechanical data-scraping (creator has 16,211,920 wikidata edits over 8 years--that's 5,552 per day, every single day, for 8 years straight) and the entry unambiguously fails the wikidata notability policy. Its use is not legitimate as contemplated by scope. Эlcobbola talk 17:55, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Brianjd@Elcobbola@Gytha@Jeff G.@JohnNewton8@Tm@Tuvalkin
- Hello, I used a tripod to take the photo
- Therefore I am the subject AND the author of this photo.
- I hold the copyright of the photo and wish to remove this image featuring a minor (myself) and published by a minor who was not in legal capacity to accept the terms of use.
- I request the deletion of this photo as the author of this image.
- Thank you (sorry i use the translation i am french) Margauxherlin (talk) 18:46, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- You're not helping your case. Please read this comment very critically. Эlcobbola talk 18:49, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, I was thinking the same. She was so close… -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:10, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- @user:elcobbola, lol, at least she is honest! Whatever: being minor she was not entitled to grant a licence JohnNewton8 (talk) 20:18, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- You're not helping your case. Please read this comment very critically. Эlcobbola talk 18:49, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Not a notable person, photo of average quality, only used on WD entry about herself (deletion requested). Yann (talk) 18:53, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- @JohnNewton8, Elcobbola, and Yann: The matter here is not scope nor courtesy, but licencing. This photo was made available by Commons for 10 years, in good faith, and likely several (many?) reusers picked it up from Commons for any number of licenced reuses. If we’d agree to delete this image from our repository we’d be pulling the rug from under those reusers — which goes against the very mission of Commons. In the interest of everybody, including the model, this image should stay available in Commons: Here she can influence its curation, while in the dozens of reusing websites where it was copied to, she very likely cannot. Her being a minor back then is not Commons’ reponsibility and the only chance of having this photo deleted on copyright grounds was squandered by her own comment at 18:46. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:20, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin: , I disagree with you. WE were the ones who were negligent when we accepted a minor's license without verification. The problem is in our procedure, it is up to us to assume the consequences. JohnNewton8 (talk) 20:27, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Btw (I am looking for a solution acceptable for everybody) : would a renaming of the file & of its description be feasible/acceptable? JohnNewton8 (talk) 20:30, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with John. I don't see any reason to keep an image of non notable minor when she requests deletion. She can be recognized, so I don't think renaming would be acceptable either. Yann (talk) 20:33, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Come on, she was old enough to have a budding modelling career or whatever (the wp.fr article was deleted), and there are billions of selfies online posted by minors every day. Commons has a much better structure in place to cater for everybody’s interests and rights than any social media platform. (Let’s see her trying this trick with Instagram!) The real issue here is the international copyright law’s rotten elephant carcass in the middle of the room, with entities like the WMF and CC trying (and rightly so!) to take it even more seriously than its sponsors, playing the litteral (Mickey) Mouse game, while the public at large, as the case of Margaux here, left eternally confused and misled.
- Demanding age verification for users would shatter the protective shield of anonimity many of us (incl. minors) need to properly contribute here. It’s really a bad idea.
- Anyway, Elcobbola offers COM:PRP as a reason for deletion, and that makes sense (unlike COM:Scope). I am still not convinced that deletion is the best solution for this matter, though. We’ll see.
- -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:50, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- As a sysop on fr-WP I had a look on the article deleted in 2012: well, one of these teenager's two-lines long harmless mistake... :) JohnNewton8 (talk) 11:03, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Brianjd@Elcobbola@Gytha@Jeff G.@JohnNewton8@Tm@Tuvalkin@Yann
- Hello, I'm really sorry for the comment...
- I am desperate, this image affects my reputation and bothers me enormously in my work.
- This is a photo of me as a minor and I hope I can erase it thanks to you and be freed from this burden
- please help me Margauxherlin (talk) 20:55, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- I just checked with both TinEye and GoogleLens and it seems that this image was not copied into any other website — which is frankly surprising, since it’s is a very nice photo that was available for free reuse for 10 years. I feared that deleting this photo from Commons would leave it “in the wild”, but seems tht’s not the case. Meanwhile the useless WD entry is liekly to be removed, and Margaux Helin was replaced by Heidi Klum in the Polish Wikipedia article about some kind of hair styling. I hope that the likely removal of this photo from Commons will make things easier for Margaux now. Bonne chance! -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:17, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin: , I disagree with you. WE were the ones who were negligent when we accepted a minor's license without verification. The problem is in our procedure, it is up to us to assume the consequences. JohnNewton8 (talk) 20:27, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Picture uploaded by an underage person (by the time of the upload), who now says it "affects [her] reputation". Non notable person, picture not used on the project (except in an empty wikidata entry about herself)... there is absolutely no reason to keep it. See also Commons:Photographs of identifiable people. Best, Jules* (talk) 11:20, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per COM:COURTESY and COM:SELFIE, this person is not notable, I don’t get why we’re splitting hairs here. Thibaut (talk) 11:47, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of courtesy to the depicted uploader, without acknowledgment of any legal necessity. --Túrelio (talk) 11:55, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Photo courtesy of UPS, which is not a work from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 01:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:19, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Photo courtesy of UPS, which is not a work from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 01:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:19, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Courtesy photo by United Launch Alliance, not a work from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 01:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:19, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Courtesy photo by United Launch Alliance, not a work from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 01:11, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:19, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
File:United Launch Alliance’s 100th launch, an Atlas V 421 flying the Morelos-3 communications satellite (22066314591).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Courtesy photo by United Launch Alliance, not a work from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 01:12, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:20, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope, blurry Joanbanjo (talk) 02:04, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:20, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
https://www.alsahwa-yemen.net/p-51992. Copyright violation Awam King (talk) 02:23, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:21, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Cover of music album can't be a personal work. Shkuru Afshar (talk) 02:31, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:22, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work of copyrighted banners A1Cafel (talk) 02:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:22, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 03:25, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:23, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 04:13, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:24, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 04:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:24, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Nebraska State Capitol interior
[edit]This is a series of 1996 murals in the Nebraska State Capitol by en:Stephen Cornelius Roberts, a living artist; the files were apparently taken from [1]. They were uploaded here with a CC license, but I don't see that license at the source web site. Per Commons:Public art and copyrights in the US#March 1, 1989 to the present, these are copyrighted for the lifetime of the artist and for 70 years after his death; they should therefore be deleted. The files can be restored 70 years after the artist's death.
- File:Stephen Cornelius Roberts.jpg
- File:The Ideal of Freedom, Stephen C. Roberts, 1996.jpg
- File:The Ideal of International Law, Stephen C. Roberts, 1996.jpg
- File:The Ideal of Self-Determination, Stephen C. Roberts, 1996.jpg
- File:The Ideal of Universal Peace, Stephen C. Roberts, 1996.jpg
- File:The Perils of Fire, Stephen C. Roberts, 1996.jpg
- File:The Scourge of Famine, Stephen C. Roberts, 1996.jpg
- File:The Scourge of Plague, Stephen C. Roberts, 1996.jpg
- File:The Scourge of Poverty, Stephen C. Roberts, 1996.jpg
Rosenzweig τ 05:08, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:26, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
ordinary person Mateus2019 (talk) 06:50, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
ordinary person Mateus2019 (talk) 06:51, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
ordinary person Mateus2019 (talk) 06:51, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:29, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
ordinary person Mateus2019 (talk) 06:51, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
ordinary person Mateus2019 (talk) 06:52, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
copyvio screenshot of a google search results page with unfree images Mateus2019 (talk) 06:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the response. I have understood the copyright issues. Pls delete the image. Vijayan Rajapuram(വിജയന് രാജപുരം) 13:06, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope Lesless (talk) 07:40, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Non-free content - derivative work, image contains copyrighted art by a living artist (Christina Quarles), photographed in Italy (no freedom of panorama) 19h00s (talk) 21:37, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:40, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
The cited website is horrible and my French is not great, but I don't see a free license release. Requesting second set of eyes though. DMacks (talk) 23:25, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete The relevant page is https://www.foot-national.com/mentions.html, and the relevant language is: "La Société, en sa qualité d'Editeur du Site, consent à l'Utilisateur un droit d'usage privé, non collectif et non exclusif sur ledit contenu. L'Utilisateur s'engage dans ces conditions à ne pas reproduire, résumer, modifier, altérer ou rediffuser, sans autorisation expresse préalable de l'Editeur, quelque texte, titre, application, logiciel, logo, marque, information ou illustration, pour un usage autre que strictement privé, ce qui exclut toute représentation à des fins professionnelles ou de rediffusion en nombre. De même, l'Utilisateur s'engage à ne pas recopier tout ou partie du site sur un autre site ou un réseau interne d'entreprise."
- I'm about to go to sleep, so I will not translate the whole thing into English, but the key point is that a user can use the contents of the site privately only and cannot reproduce anything to any other site without express authorization of the Editor. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:57, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the translation! DMacks (talk) 14:38, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Sure thing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:42, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the translation! DMacks (talk) 14:38, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:39, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
out of scope? Trade (talk) 23:31, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:37, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 23:31, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:36, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
out of scope? Trade (talk) 23:32, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:36, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 23:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:35, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation. Rampion (talk) 10:26, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:56, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
File:Указ Президента Туркменистана о присвоении тов. Мамедову Г.Д. почетного звания "Заслуженный артист Туркменистана".jpg
[edit]
Possible copyvio: Photograph of a newspaper CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Photograph of a newspaper CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Unfortunately, France has no freedom-of-panorama exception. So, if the depicted board is located in France, it needs to be deleted as copyvio. -- Túrelio (talk) 11:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:58, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: There is a mention of Copyright in the metadata CoffeeEngineer (talk) 11:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:58, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Seems to lack notability. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:51, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Low quality COM:PENIS photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 16:30, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:50, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Low quality COM:PENIS photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 16:30, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:49, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Low quality COM:PENIS photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 16:30, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:49, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Low quality COM:PENIS photo, unlikely to have educational use. The user's only uploads.
- File:Flaccid penis3.jpg
- File:Scrotum3.jpg
- File:Flaccid penis2.jpg
- File:Erected penis2.jpg
- File:Erected penis3.jpg
- File:Erected penis4.jpg
A1Cafel (talk) 16:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- @A1Cafel Does it matter that we know the age and origin of the subject? Brianjd (talk) 12:48, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think this matters. Even the age of origin included, it doesn't increase the educational value of the photos. --A1Cafel (talk) 15:09, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:49, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:53, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:48, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Nominating for Deletion because this image is blank and nobody can't see what this is supposed to be also you didn't put NOAA's copyright information in the Licensing area. Cyclonetracker7586 (talk) 18:54, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Unusable file. TornadoLGS (talk) 22:30, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:45, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by GlobaLLaboIG (talk · contribs)
[edit]Low-quality, grainy dickpics.
HyperGaruda (talk) 20:12, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:45, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by VadErs88 as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: copyvio. COM:TOO? —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:16, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I think it would be under COM:TOO in the U.S., but I don't know what standards are used in Italy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:38, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep {{PD-textlogo}}. Yann (talk) 18:42, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Speedy delete copyvio in the Italian law.--VadErs88 (talk) 19:51, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- @VadErs88 COM:TOO Italy would suggest otherwise. Brianjd (talk) 12:59, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:44, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Courtesy photo by Bangladesh Air Force, not a work from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 01:15, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Swedish Armed Forces courtesy photo, not a work from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 01:15, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Courtesy photo, which means this photo is not come from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 01:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Courtesy photo, which means this photo is not come from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 01:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Courtesy photo, which means this photo is not come from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 01:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Photo courtesy of Rune Dyrholm, Danish Royal Army, not a work from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 01:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Courtesy photo, which means this photo is not come from the US Federal Government A1Cafel (talk) 01:21, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Photo Courtesy of Bryan Blanken, not a work from the Office of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi A1Cafel (talk) 01:26, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in Rwanda A1Cafel (talk) 02:22, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Rwanda A1Cafel (talk) 02:24, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Rwanda A1Cafel (talk) 02:31, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for "graphic works" in the United Kingdom A1Cafel (talk) 03:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for "graphic works" in Canada A1Cafel (talk) 03:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for "graphic works" in Canada A1Cafel (talk) 03:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for "graphic works" in Canada A1Cafel (talk) 03:22, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for "graphic works" in Canada A1Cafel (talk) 03:23, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for "graphic works" in the United Kingdom A1Cafel (talk) 03:24, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 03:24, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 03:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 07:48, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative work of copyrighted leftlets A1Cafel (talk) 08:06, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Is this really a work by the U.S. federal government, as required for the claimed PD-status, or is it just used on a government-website? An uncropped version of the same image was already in 2013 on the now defunct website of the depicted person, as evidenced by an archive-org-shot from Oct 17, 2013. -- Túrelio (talk) 09:07, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Derived work fom a character copyrighted by Disney/Pixar. Apparently, there's no permission from the copyright holders. Ruthven (msg) 14:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused screenshot of questionable notability. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:04, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 16:17, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Low quality COM:PENIS photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 16:26, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Low quality COM:PENIS photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 16:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Low quality COM:PENIS photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 16:28, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted red pocket A1Cafel (talk) 16:39, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
edited file. source neded --Minorax«¦talk¦» 17:42, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Covers and posters can be in Commons only with VRT-permission from copyright holder (representative of football club?). Taivo (talk) 19:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
I could not find other license on source site than "© Copyright Universidad de Oviedo". Maybe this is copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 20:45, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Protected Disney program logo. Looking for second opinions if above TOO (I think the drawing in one of the letters pushes it over that threshold). DMacks (talk) 23:28, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Presumed-protected logo. Looking for second opinions if above TOO (I think the drawing in one of the letters pushes it over that threshold). DMacks (talk) 23:30, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 23:32, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:47, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
No FoP in Rwanda. The crop fails de minimis A1Cafel (talk) 02:22, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as uploader. The OP is correct, and apologies for uploading a non-compliant image. Amakuru (talk) 10:21, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:27, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
This is a lower-quality upload of the same file here. I did not realize this photo was already on commons. Self-request. Indy beetle (talk) 04:09, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
ordinary person Mateus2019 (talk) 06:53, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
ordinary person Mateus2019 (talk) 06:54, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope: excluded educational content. Raw text. Better hosted elsewhere. Headlock0225 (talk) 08:48, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation. Non-free photo of living person. No evidences that original of the photo is published under CC-BY-SA. Rampion (talk) 10:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
out of scope image Martin Urbanec (talk) 12:23, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:29, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Alerton1345 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused promo materials of company of questionable notability.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:42, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete the first image, but on the second, note w:Alerton. I'd suggest Keeping the logo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:51, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:29, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Vanity photo, only used at en:User talk:Aaratrika Das Fayenatic london (talk) 16:46, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
_(11573011963).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(11573011963).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
and:
- File:2006 08 23 Robert Wohnung 003 (48682398681).jpg
- File:2006 08 23 Robert Wohnung 001 (48682573852).jpg
- File:2006 10 29 Amsterdam 287 (51089272697).jpg
- File:2006 10 29 Amsterdam 168 (51089728428).jpg
- File:2006 10 30 Amsterdam 425 (51089258914).jpg
- File:2006 10 30 Amsterdam 466 Rembrandtplein (51089258894).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
_(11573011963).jpg){kind=link}
- Delete all per nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:46, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
_(11573011963).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Ich möchte dieses Bild löschen. Kann es aber nicht mehr. Das Bild ist von mir. Danke Felix Peierl (talk) 18:09, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete by courtesy. --Achim55 (talk) 19:30, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
out of scope Trade (talk) 23:30, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
out of scope Trade (talk) 23:30, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
out of scope? Trade (talk) 23:31, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Ce portrait imaginaire de St-Paul-hors-les-Murs, représente Benoît X, qui n'est plus reconnu comme pape. Voir https://fr.dreamstime.com/photo-stock-pape-antipape-beno%C3%AEt-x-image99451244 Sumenol (talk) 13:52, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep No valid reason given for deletion.
- See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Silvestro3.jpg likewise. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:51, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- You can keep, but you will keep an ERROR. If the photo sent does not convince you, you can also go to https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html The images are indisputable, but you have to search a little (left part towards the choir). Otherwise, if you are still not convinced, you can go to St Paul outside the Walls. The error comes from the posters sold on site. As many portraits are imaginary. They did not want to leave the Sylvester III box (considered in the 19th century as an antipope) empty. They replaced that of Benedict X (then considered pope). Afterwards, you do as you want, but I will have done my job by pointing out the problem to you Sumenol (talk) 02:40, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- The image description already knows and says it's "antipope Benedict X.". No reason to delete the file. --MF-W 14:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- Comme elle n'illustre a priori aucun article, cela ne pose pas trop de problème. Mais il faudra la renommer pour qu'on ne puisse plus faire le lien avec Sylvestre III. Ce n'est pas le cas d'une autre image identique qui elle entraîne beaucoup d'erreurs sur Wikipedia. Sumenol (talk) 17:06, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- The image description already knows and says it's "antipope Benedict X.". No reason to delete the file. --MF-W 14:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- You can keep, but you will keep an ERROR. If the photo sent does not convince you, you can also go to https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html The images are indisputable, but you have to search a little (left part towards the choir). Otherwise, if you are still not convinced, you can go to St Paul outside the Walls. The error comes from the posters sold on site. As many portraits are imaginary. They did not want to leave the Sylvester III box (considered in the 19th century as an antipope) empty. They replaced that of Benedict X (then considered pope). Afterwards, you do as you want, but I will have done my job by pointing out the problem to you Sumenol (talk) 02:40, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion, in use. --Krd 10:14, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
This portrait is still widely used to represent Sylvester III while it shows Antipope Benedict X (see https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html) Sumenol (talk) 16:56, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
- Still no reason to delete it. Change the description, even rename it, but deletion is not appropriate. A representation of Benedict X is just as valid here as one of Sylvester III.
- Besides which, you've given no comprehensible evidence to support your claim. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:16, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Krd 14:11, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
Andy Dingley wrote this amazing sentence to refuse the second deletion: "you've given no comprehensible evidence to support your claim". Yet what is more obvious than a photo (accessible via the link https://www.alamy.it/papa-antipapa-benedetto-x-nato-giovanni-fu-papa-dal-1058 -al-1059-la-basilica-di-san-paolo-fuori-le-mura-roma-italia-image448503796.html) showing that the falsely used portrait is that of Benedictus X (which cannot be translated as Silvestre III) . And if there is still a little doubt, this second link (https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html) allows (by searching a little) you to put the medallion back in its environment of origin.
As long as there is the slightest link on Wikipedia between Silvestre III and the image whose deletion is requested, there will be an error on Wikipedia. Wishing like everyone else that this source of information be as reliable as possible, my duty will be to have this error removed on the basis of an indisputable fact easily verifiable with the evidence that I bring.Sumenol (talk) 05:26, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
1 013 / 5 000 Résultats de traduction On Wikipedia, several images have used the medallion of Antipope Benedict X from the outset to illustrate the imaginary portrait of Silvestre III. But the latter was not considered a legitimate pope in the 19th century, when the mosaics were made at Saint Paul outside the Walls. No image represents it. The most used fake portrait was eliminated from Wikipedia a few weeks ago. But there are others including this one, which is still falsely used on several Wikipedia pages. It must be removed because it perpetuates the error. The small corrective notice written on this page is not enough. This error is indisputable. Voir : https://www.alamy.it/papa-antipapa-benedetto-x-nato-giovanni-fu-papa-dal-1058-al-1059-la-basilica-di-san-paolo-fuori-le-mura-roma-italia-image448503796.html and search at https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html Sumenol (talk) 03:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Andy Dingley wrote this amazing sentence to refuse the second deletion: "you've given no comprehensible evidence to support your claim". Yet what is more obvious than a photo (accessible via the link https://www.alamy.it/papa-antipapa-benedetto-x-nato-giovanni-fu-papa-dal-1058 -al-1059-la-basilica-di-san-paolo-fuori-le-mura-roma-italia-image448503796.html) showing that the falsely used portrait is that of Benedictus X (which cannot be translated as Silvestre III) . And if there is still a little doubt, this second link (https://www.vatican.va/various/basiliche/san_paolo/vr_tour/Media/VR/St_Paul_Nave/index.html) allows (by searching a little) to replace the medallion in its original environment. As long as there is the slightest link on Wikipedia between Silvestre III and the image whose deletion is requested, there will be an error on Wikipedia. Wishing like everyone else that this source of information be as reliable as possible, my duty will be to have this error removed on the basis of an indisputable fact easily verifiable with the evidence that I bring. Sumenol (talk) 05:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Your "duty" is to start a discussion on the file's talk page and stop being disruptive by starting one deletion request after another for a file that's in use on multiple sites. It may be time to suspend your editing privileges. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:48, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Sumenol You failed to ping Andy Dingley, who also suggested that you request a rename. That is what you should have done. Brianjd (talk) 12:02, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Sumenol and Ikan Kekek: I have tagged the file {{Fact disputed}}. Brianjd (talk) 12:00, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- It took me almost a year to cancel a first link between a portrait of Silvestre III and that of Benedict X. We are touching here on a very heavy problem of form on Wikipedia, which sometimes harms the substance. I have given you all the evidence of the error. You can call me a troublemaker, threaten to punish me. But that won't change the facts. As long as there is a link between Sylvester III and the portrait, there will be an error on Wikipedia. So, maybe it's time to be constructive and break this link rather than wanting to "destroy" the one who reports the error and proves it, while not being a Wikipedia specialist like you (I see basic problems). Sumenol (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- There are those who favor construction, and others who want to destroy difference. I just read a message from a contributor who thanked me for changing the portrait of Sylvester III. Sumenol (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- You don't seem to understand that Deletion requests is not the right place to have the debate you are trying to have. Images that are in use simply do not get deleted on this kind of basis, and you will never resolve anything by continuing to try to debate facts on Deletion requests. That is why you may have to be suspended if you keep this up - it's disruptive for no useful purpose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:41, 23 November 2022 (UTC)
- There are those who favor construction, and others who want to destroy difference. I just read a message from a contributor who thanked me for changing the portrait of Sylvester III. Sumenol (talk) 17:46, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- It took me almost a year to cancel a first link between a portrait of Silvestre III and that of Benedict X. We are touching here on a very heavy problem of form on Wikipedia, which sometimes harms the substance. I have given you all the evidence of the error. You can call me a troublemaker, threaten to punish me. But that won't change the facts. As long as there is a link between Sylvester III and the portrait, there will be an error on Wikipedia. So, maybe it's time to be constructive and break this link rather than wanting to "destroy" the one who reports the error and proves it, while not being a Wikipedia specialist like you (I see basic problems). Sumenol (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: As before. Please do not nominate again for the same invalid reason. --Krd 09:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Because it is Logo Yesseruser (talk) 10:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:44, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Seems to come from this Youtube video without Creative Commons mention https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qO1SD3i7EA CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:30, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:44, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
notable clear lens Muhammadnijamuddin (talk) 10:35, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- The picture is clear enough and no copyright violation. --Wikiwal (talk) 11:53, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Indeed. The words are readable even at thumbnail size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:17, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Muhammadnijamuddin Please use a proper Babel tag on your user page. Brianjd (talk) 12:32, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Krd 09:45, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Possible copyvio: Picture from Instagram CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:41, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Photo from a social media according to the arrow on the left and the dots at the bottom CoffeeEngineer (talk) 11:54, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:44, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Chiyaqadri (talk · contribs)
[edit]These images are out of scope because the user is not active and have used wikimedia space as a personal webpage and to promote themself [2]. (Please see Commons:Project scope#File in use in another Wikimedia project)
HeminKurdistan (talk) 12:18, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete I looked at a few of these pictures and they aren't great, either. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: in use. if the user page is promotional, it should be deleted first. --Krd 09:48, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Book cover CoffeeEngineer (talk) 14:12, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:49, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Above COM:TOO? Leonel Sohns 14:23, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:49, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Above COM:TOO? Leonel Sohns 14:23, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- I believe so. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:05, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:49, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Above COM:TOO? Leonel Sohns 14:23, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:49, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Above COM:TOO? Leonel Sohns 14:23, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- I claim no expertise, but I would think so. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:04, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:49, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Typical Albanian (talk · contribs)
[edit]No EXIF data, unlikely to be own works, seeing this user's history.
Yann (talk) 14:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:44, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:09, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Decent portrait; could be kept as such but probably won't be. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:50, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Low quality COM:PENIS photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 16:29, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep We need all shapes and all sizes. --RAN (talk) 03:16, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) Is this a different shape or size to existing images?
- Anyway, it has a suspiciously low resolution (835 × 835), particularly for a 2021 image, and the penis itself is not very clear. Brianjd (talk) 12:43, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:50, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Uploaded for User:Arshy Arsh/sandbox/H&M SERVE LTD. No other use --Minorax«¦talk¦» 17:43, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Had this been a logo for w:H&M and properly licensed, that would have been great! However, it is not, and H&M Serve is not on the first or second page of my search results, so it doesn't appear notable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:41, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:50, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope: Election map of a fictional country Enyavar (talk) 17:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:51, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
too small to be useful. Out of project scope. Estopedist1 (talk) 19:59, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 09:45, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Uploader placed a malformed deletion tag, but it also seems to be a cropped and brightness-adjusted derivative of the image here by Henk Douma, who also wrote the linked article. https://onh.nl/disclaimer indicates that permission is needed for republication of their content, making this likely to be a copyright violation. HyperGaruda (talk) 08:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:10, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Lower-resolution version of File:Яркость1.jpg. Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 09:46, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:11, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
File:A critical analysis of ocean thermal analysis models in operation at FNOC. (IA criticalanalysis00brad).pdf
[edit]This one is tricky. The research is certainly federally funded. However the Author is a Royal Navy Officer (UK) not a US one. There is no obvious copyright notice however. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:36, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep The origin of the author is irrelevant – what matters is the place of first publication and this was obviously the US. Moreover there is no copyright notice and no subsequent registration in the Catalog of Copyright Entries., so the file is {{PD-US-1978-89}}. De728631 (talk) 14:52, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Per PD-US-1978-89. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:13, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: The picture is not from 2022 CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:55, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:15, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
As freedom-of-panorama exception in the UK does not cover 2D "graphic works", it needs to be evaluated whether the 3 depicted photographic portraits are out of copyright or still copyrighted. -- Túrelio (talk) 10:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:39, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Appears to be a very close copy of copyright work. Original is here and is referenced (with acknowledgment) here by the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce. The uploader is an SPA who locates to a suburb of Edinburgh by the coordinates on the file.. Fails to comply withcopyright violation policies Velella (talk) 11:44, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:DW. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:39, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Umm_Al-Qura_University_logo.png HeminKurdistan (talk) 11:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:17, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
suspected CopyVio (file has signature from d-maps.com, which is not the uploader) Enyavar (talk) 17:58, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:36, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
This track map isn't up to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons standards, Also didn't this guy get banned from English Wikipedia and Espanol Wikipedia for Sockpuppeting? I thought someone put a global lock on him. Cyclonetracker7586 (talk) 18:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Extremely low-quality image that cannot be used. Too pixelated to see any context. TornadoLGS (talk) 22:37, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Also @Cyclonetracker7586: I floated the idea of a global lock on EN, but I didn't request on Meta it until today. That has now been done. TornadoLGS (talk) 03:19, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- @TornadoLGS Okay that's good news. Cyclonetracker7586 (talk) 03:22, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- Also @Cyclonetracker7586: I floated the idea of a global lock on EN, but I didn't request on Meta it until today. That has now been done. TornadoLGS (talk) 03:19, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:36, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by سماح ابو الچود (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal files
- File:Jpg صورة 11.jpg
- File:Jpg صورة 10.jpg
- File:Jpg صورة 9.jpg
- File:Jpg صورة 7.jpg
- File:Jpg صورة 5.jpg
- File:Jpg صورة 4.jpg
- File:Jpg صورة 6.jpg
- File:Jpg صورة 2.jpg
- File:Jpg صورة 3.jpg
- File:Jpg صورة.jpg
- File:262jpg.jpg
- File:242 jpg.jpg
- File:((0141221jpg)).jpg
- File:333 jpg.jpg
).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
— Racconish 💬 22:18, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:28, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Album cover CoffeeEngineer (talk) 12:05, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
![12:05, 19 November 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/11/19#c-CoffeeEngineer-20221119120500-File:Carátula_Single_"Cielo_Fuego".jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Kadı Message 19:47, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
![19:47, 26 November 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/11/19#c-Kadı-20221126194700-File:Carátula_Single_"Cielo_Fuego".jpg){kind=link}
Mauvaise qualité de l'image Loïc432 (talk) 23:54, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:51, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Image non pertinente Loïc432 (talk) 23:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:51, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Image non pertinente Loïc432 (talk) 23:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:52, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Image en doublon Loïc432 (talk) 23:58, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:52, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Image non pertinente Loïc432 (talk) 23:59, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:52, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Personal image ; No notability ; No use : Commons is not a private photo album Tangopaso (talk) 15:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Alaa :)..! 15:19, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This constitutes a deriviative work of the display, and there is no license or freedom of panorama for the subject display.
—Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- there doesn't need to be freedom of panorama for the display. what an awful argument to make. freedom of panorama doesn't apply for this. it's an indoor display and I got permission from the store manager to take a photo. Godofwarfan333 (talk) 14:43, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- Please see COM:DW. When you take a photograph of a designed object, like the store display, in a country with no freedom of panorama,, the copyright of the object applies to the photograph as well. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 03:16, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Godofwarfan333 What @Adeletron 3030 said is correct. I would emphasise that you need permission from the copyright owner of the display. It is inconceivable that the store manager is the copyright owner, so their permission doesn’t count. Brianjd (talk) 12:56, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- lmao this was so pointless Godofwarfan333 (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- what was the point of this charade 😂 Godofwarfan333 (talk) 15:36, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Эlcobbola talk 17:07, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This magazine cover was uploaded under the PD-TEXTLOGO license, but obviously it is more than a logo. The cover image is of text only, listing the titles of articles with the page numbers, so perhaps the intent was to claim PD-TEXT? I'm uncertain it applies, but if others support it, I'd consider it. Senator2029 03:06, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- Keep "logo" is, of course, wrong, but I see nothing copyrightable there. - Jmabel ! talk 05:48, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- I thought that {{PD-text}} sounded good until I realised that it was from the UK, not the US. Is this below even the UK TOO? Brianjd (talk) 11:54, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Not copyrightable at all, should be tagged with a {{PD-text}} license and that's it. – Fma12 (talk) 10:58, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. ✗plicit 23:44, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Possible copyright violation ProfAuthor (talk) 20:03, 11 November 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ProfAuthor as Speedy (db-author) and the most recent rationale was: author Yann (talk) 13:17, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
- In use. Yann (talk) 13:18, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
- File is no longer in use ProfAuthor (talk) 16:06, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
- It is in use in en:Thames Valley Police. Yann (talk) 16:17, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
- File is no longer in use ProfAuthor (talk) 16:06, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion: In use. --Kadı Message 19:06, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
May be a copyright violation - unsure. ProfAuthor (talk) 12:02, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:45, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep: there is an article about this singer-songwriter in id.wikipedia. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:03, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- @EugeneZelenko What does your rationale actually mean? How can it be trivial if it is also tagged for deletion because it is missing copyright tags? Should a signature really be in SVG, and what does that have to do with deletion anyway? Brianjd (talk) 12:36, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Rationale means that unused file is not in best format possible. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:40, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- @EugeneZelenko A signature is a complex drawing that is supposed to be produced directly by the person who owns it. Are you really suggesting a signature would be better as SVG? Brianjd (talk) 15:44, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Rationale means that unused file is not in best format possible. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:40, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- This particular one seems like standard font. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:45, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: by Krd, no license. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
No source, no author and no evidence of the claimed CC-BY-SA licence. — Racconish 💬 08:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- As mentioned, this cropped photo of a relative of mine on his wedding day in Prague is from my family collection, the paper version does not bear any identifying information, (the author is unknown). If anything further is needed please let me know. --DDupard (talk) 02:08, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Finland, and {{PD-Finland50}} – "The right to a photographic picture [that does not qualify as a "work of art"] shall be in force until 50 years have elapsed from the end of the year during which the photographic picture was made. [404/1961–2015 Sec.49a]"
- Picture is from 1948, subject is a portrait of a Finnish official. If anything further is needed, please feel free to ask.--DDupard (talk) 12:45, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- Since the work was not created in Finland but in Prague- furthermore by an author unknown to the uploader- there is no reason to claim the application of PD-Finland. — Racconish 💬 18:05, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- Embassy ground of a country is usually the same as the country. Permissions is to be sent in a day to OTRS/VTRS.--DDupard (talk) 19:15, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- VTRS is for CC-BY-SA, which you do not seem to claim any more, not for PD. — Racconish 💬 07:47, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Ah thank you for explaining something. I confess that I do not understand the subtleties of the various licences (nor the automatic uploader sometimes). I just happened to notice that an article on Olli Vallila had been created on the Finnish Wikipedia, and since we owned an image, I offered to donate it for that specific article. Hopefully it can be accepted. Best to you.--DDupard (talk) 13:34, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator Racconish, is there anything else, I should know or add to the file page? Any information you could share is welcome. (Original photo was shot within the confines of Finnish embassy)--DDupard (talk) 12:33, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, Benoît Prieur, Kallerna, Havang(nl), Ellin Beltz, I am at a loss here, could someone pitch in to advance the cause please. Thanks a mil.--DDupard (talk) 14:20, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. According to DDupard taken in 1948, which is in line with the Wikipedia article (second marriage). And he worked in the Finnish embassy. —kallerna (talk) 15:07, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I agree with above keep arguments.--Havang(nl) (talk) 16:37, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, Benoît Prieur, Kallerna, Havang(nl), Ellin Beltz, I am at a loss here, could someone pitch in to advance the cause please. Thanks a mil.--DDupard (talk) 14:20, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator Racconish, is there anything else, I should know or add to the file page? Any information you could share is welcome. (Original photo was shot within the confines of Finnish embassy)--DDupard (talk) 12:33, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- Ah thank you for explaining something. I confess that I do not understand the subtleties of the various licences (nor the automatic uploader sometimes). I just happened to notice that an article on Olli Vallila had been created on the Finnish Wikipedia, and since we owned an image, I offered to donate it for that specific article. Hopefully it can be accepted. Best to you.--DDupard (talk) 13:34, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- VTRS is for CC-BY-SA, which you do not seem to claim any more, not for PD. — Racconish 💬 07:47, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
- Embassy ground of a country is usually the same as the country. Permissions is to be sent in a day to OTRS/VTRS.--DDupard (talk) 19:15, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- Since the work was not created in Finland but in Prague- furthermore by an author unknown to the uploader- there is no reason to claim the application of PD-Finland. — Racconish 💬 18:05, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, see discussion. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:29, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 颐园居 as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: G7. 作者或上傳者請求刪除，上传版本错误，删除后重新上传 In use. Yann (talk) 11:11, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
- 作者請求删除后重新上传新的版本--颐园居 (talk) 12:10, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
- 作者請求删除后重新上传新版 颐园居 (talk) 15:37, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
- 作者或上傳者請求刪除，上传版本错误，重新上传 颐园居 (talk) 06:44, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- @颐园居: Are you aware that you can upload a new version over the existing version? It is not necessary to delete the old version to do this. If there is a particular reason you need the old version deleted first it would be best if you explained what it is. Xover (talk) 06:53, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Per author request. Not in use. SCP-2000 07:19, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Courtesy deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 07:15, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Rkt2312 as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G2. Redirect is both plausible and used. Keep. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. File was also under this title for over a year. --𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:00, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
The artifacts raise doubt on the "own work" claim. COM:PCP. Veverve (talk) 16:40, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Editor has a history of good-faith escutcheon uploads and a Graphic Designer's Barnstar. No valid reason given for deletion.
- Elizium23 (talk) 19:01, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:37, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Please delete the image I've uploaded earlier today. Uploaded by mistake. It is probably a copyrighted image IsraelHikingMap (talk) 18:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- @IsraelHikingMap: Which image do you mean? The file File:IHM שלוחת נוצה.jpeg was uploaded over a month ago, not "earlier today". --Rosenzweig τ 10:35, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Rosenzweig: Please ignore the "today" word and delete the file File:IHM שלוחת נוצה.jpeg --IsraelHikingMap (talk) 10:52, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 11:53, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Copyright. Lifetime portraits of person from the 18th century cannot be licensed under the {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} license. Vladis13 (talk) 09:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- No, they'd obviously be in the public domain. So why are you nominating this and a 19th-century portrait for deletion? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Presumably 19th-century portrait is a reference to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Фото основоположников Народничества - Цв.jpg. See my comment there. Brianjd (talk) 12:22, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Obviously this is copyright infringement. Or are you claiming that the person who uploaded it lived in the 19th-century? Plus, it's definitely a duplicate. But I can’t check, the uploader, having plagiarized the file, did not bother to categorize and describe it. --Vladis13 (talk) 15:11, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Vladis13 Again, see my comments at the other DR. But note that this file is 18th century, not 19th century, so we can safely assume it is no longer copyrighted (as stated above); something that’s not copyrighted can’t be copyright infringement. Brianjd (talk) 11:12, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- You do not understand the basics, and in this phrase you are advocating violation of the law and the rules of the project about plagiarism, as well as about Commons:Derivative works (translations, editorial changes, Commons :Freedom of panorama, etc.). Study the rules, please, I see no reason to continue the discussion with you. I think the administrators need to check your contribution, maybe you plagiarized works of Shakespeare and translations of it into other languages, claiming that you wrote them. --Vladis13 (talk) 20:51, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Vladis13 Again, see my comments at the other DR. But note that this file is 18th century, not 19th century, so we can safely assume it is no longer copyrighted (as stated above); something that’s not copyrighted can’t be copyright infringement. Brianjd (talk) 11:12, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- The original is there: File:Alexander Radishchev portrait.jpg. But this picture is an painter derivative work, that violates the copyrights of a contemporary painter (work theft). It is obvious. --Vladis13 (talk) 20:51, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- Obviously this is copyright infringement. Or are you claiming that the person who uploaded it lived in the 19th-century? Plus, it's definitely a duplicate. But I can’t check, the uploader, having plagiarized the file, did not bother to categorize and describe it. --Vladis13 (talk) 15:11, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:30, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Copyright. Lifetime portraits of persons from the 19th century cannot be licensed under the {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} license. Vladis13 (talk) 09:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: To respond to your comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Радищев.jpg: The licensing tutorial displayed in the Upload Wizard suggests that public domain works are usually those over 150 years old. It is certainly not clear that a 19th-century work would be public domain. Brianjd (talk) 12:24, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Ugh! But OK, then what about the 18th-century work? Surely public domain, right? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:47, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek I think it would be generally assumed that an 18th-century work is in the public domain. Brianjd (talk) 14:20, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- Obviously this is copyright infringement. Or are you claiming that the person who uploaded it lived in the 18th-century? Plus, it's definitely a duplicate. But I can’t check, the uploader, having plagiarized the file, did not bother to categorize and describe it. --Vladis13 (talk) 15:11, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Vladis13 Obviously this is plagiarism, but that is not a reason for deletion (nor is a failure to correctly describe or categorise the file). Is it copyright infringement? It can’t be, if the file is no longer copyrighted. But someone smarter than me needs to work out whether that is the case.
- You do not understand the basics, and in this phrase you are advocating violation of the law and the rules of the project about plagiarism, as well as about Commons:Derivative works (translations, editorial changes, Commons :Freedom of panorama, etc.). Study the rules, please, I see no reason to continue the discussion with you. I think the administrators need to check your contribution, maybe you plagiarized works of Shakespeare and translations of it into other languages, claiming that you wrote them. --Vladis13 (talk) 20:51, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Vladis13 Obviously this is plagiarism, but that is not a reason for deletion (nor is a failure to correctly describe or categorise the file). Is it copyright infringement? It can’t be, if the file is no longer copyrighted. But someone smarter than me needs to work out whether that is the case.
- Ugh! But OK, then what about the 18th-century work? Surely public domain, right? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:47, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- You also say the file is a duplicate? That’s much more useful. What is it a duplicate of? Brianjd (talk) 11:09, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- In the original of the 19th century, they are black-and-white or painted in oil. And this is a derivative work of a modern painters, that is, this is the theft of the works of modern authors. It is obvious. --Vladis13 (talk) 20:51, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- The 3rd portrait is a modern color reworking of this photo http://gertsen.lit-info.ru/foto/picture/28/gercen-7124.htm. (List of all surviving portraits of the person: http://gertsen.lit-info.ru/foto/) There is the original of the 4th person: File:Nikolaj_Gavrilovič_Černyševskij.jpg. --Vladis13 (talk) 21:14, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- You also say the file is a duplicate? That’s much more useful. What is it a duplicate of? Brianjd (talk) 11:09, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 20:31, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Orchi as duplicate (dupe) and the most recent rationale was: File:Vanda cristata.jpg
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as per Commons:Deletion policy#Duplicates (PNG -> JPEG). -- Túrelio (talk) 21:09, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- Keep. No reason to delete high-quality png copies as they provide a stable uncompressed base for editing. IronGargoyle (talk) 15:30, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per IronGargoyle, also in use at en.wikisource. --Rosenzweig τ 21:40, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Files uploaded by Arilang1234 (talk · contribs)
[edit]https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/video/madam-chiang-kai-shek-makes-statement-about-japanese-news-footage/98441957 "Madam Chiang Kai Shek makes statement about Japanese bombing raids in Nanking and elsewhere in China / She asks for boycott of Japanese goods / Chiang Kai-shek stands by her side. Madam Chiang Blasts Japanese War Terrorism on October 13, 1937 in Nanking, China" "Credit:Film Audio Services - Footage. Editorial #:98441957"
probably still copyrighted.
RZuo (talk) 15:04, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. How does this not fit {{PD-China-film}}? — Preceding unsigned comment added by IronGargoyle (talk • contribs)
- it's unclear who's the copyright owner. it's also unclear whether this footage was "first published in china", so chinese copyright rules may not apply. https://www.britishpathe.com/video/VLVAA9ZQN9GEVOJ0WJOE65FYIVU3W-CHINA-DEFENCE-CHINA-FIGHTS-ON is the same clip, and they claim this is owned by reuters and british pathe?--RZuo (talk) 18:03, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The information at British Pathe suggests that this was first broadcast as part of the British Paramount Newsreel, so the place of first publication seems to be the UK. This will make it protected in the UK on the URAA date and thus protected in the US unless it was simultaneously broadcast there without a copyright notice. Felix QW (talk) 21:21, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Imho it is higly likely that this film, dating 1940, has been lawfully published in China at some moment, but more then 50 years ago, so the film is in pd per {{PD-China-film}}. Therefore I decided to keep the file. --Ellywa (talk) 23:09, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Arilang1234 (talk · contribs)
[edit]4m0s still copyrighted 1943 TIME cover. 5m30s TV series screenshot? full speech (20+min) available File:Madame Chiang Kai Shek of China Addressed the House of Representatives on 18 February 1943.mp3.
RZuo (talk) 14:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: imho the 5m30 possibly TV screenshot can be considered "de minimis" for the full film. --Ellywa (talk) 23:13, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Arilang1234 (talk · contribs)
[edit]04:00-04:30 = 30s . 05:30-06:00 = 30s . (30+30)/657 = 9.13% . The images taking up the whole screen lasting for 30s each are not "incidental inclusion". 9.13% is not de minimis. And these are only two of the obvious copyvios. Whole video is full of unsourced photos.
RZuo (talk) 00:12, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
- Probably best reduced to the audio. --RAN (talk) 00:51, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
- audio is here File:Madame Chiang Kai Shek of China Addressed the House of Representatives on 18 February 1943.mp3, twice as long as this video. RZuo (talk) 01:18, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, use File:Madame Chiang Kai Shek of China Addressed the House of Representatives on 18 February 1943.mp3 instead. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:14, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Arilang1234 (talk · contribs)
[edit]includes footage not produced by VOA.
- File:美国 北约 军事制裁卡扎菲 中国管制茉莉花集会.ogv 3m40s daniel craig psa
- File:中国二次茉莉花集会 记者警察冲突.ogv 1m7s 2m15s other tv stations' footage
RZuo (talk) 15:48, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Abzeronow (talk) 20:13, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:53, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Question Did you do a web search on Fergus O'Farrell? If not, do so. I don't think notability is the issue here (take w:Interference (band) as a starting point if you like). The problem is that this is likely copyvio. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:43, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete without VRT evidence of permission. The photo is both marked as "Own work" and as a photograph by David Cleary without any indication that the uploader and David Cleary are the same individual. Felix QW (talk) 21:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Артём 13327 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Screenshot. COM:TOO? —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Probably below TOO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:36, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. Is it appropriate to use the Swedish or US threshold of originality here? Mojang was a Swedish company that got bought by Microsoft, an American company. IronGargoyle (talk) 15:34, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as a COM:SCREENSHOT from a copyrighted video game. Nothing TOO about a full screenshot. Plenty of these have been deleted in the past, although most were in gameplay and not menu. — HELLKNOWZ ∣ TALK ∣ enWiki 20:05, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Hellknowz No, the only thing that matters is whether it is complex enough to be eligible for copyright. It doesn’t matter whether it was created by executing a video game, by entering commands into a graphics program or by some other method. Brianjd (talk) 11:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Leonel Sohns 09:00, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Definitely exceeds TOO. –IagoQnsi (talk) 23:48, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Photo previously published in 2013 (https://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/1392/09/17/214186/دوش-پرتاب-میثاق-رقیب-قدرتمند-استینگر-و-rbs-انهدام-اهداف-متحرک-در-8-ثانیه and many other sources). It is impossible for this photo to have been taken by akkasemosalman.ir in 2015 if it was already published in 2013. Streamline8988 (talk) 06:15, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:19, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Low quality SVG coat of arms. Heraldrybranding (talk) 12:02, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep COM:INUSE —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; not in use. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:20, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/HSG Bochum
[edit]Copyrighted logos which might exceed COM:TOO Germany
-M.nelson (talk) 13:37, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
дублюе файл Пятуховіч Замоцін Колас.pdf VasyaRogov (talk) 05:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, files are different, one has 10 pages, the other 18 and both are in use on the projects. --Ellywa (talk) 22:38, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Kanhoji Angre's bust has been reuploaded with wrong name and description. Source image: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bust_of_Kanhoji_Angre.jpeg Pratish Khedekar 06:40, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, of no educational use due to unsharpness. Not in use on the projects and redundant as well. --Ellywa (talk) 22:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Rhodesia vectors after 1973
[edit]- File:Rhodesian Combined Operations Logo.svg
- File:7 Independent Company.svg
- File:Selous Scouts Logo.svg
- File:Grey's Scouts Insignia.svg
These files were incorrectly uploaded by me as free files on commons. They should be deleted as they are copyright violations, and I will reupload them in a smaller format on Wikipedia as non-free files, where they are covered under Fair Use. I came to this conclusion following a dicussion with Nick-D (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nick-D#Grey%27s_Scouts_insignia). --Sprucecopse (talk) 11:54, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep These don't look like copyright violations to me, they are the work of the author. They are SVGs vectorized based on photographs. Di (they-them) (talk) 22:55, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete These images are carbon copy reproductions of Rhodesian government images which are still under Zimbabwean copyright. I'm not sure why this has gone to a deletion request given the request could have been handled through COM:GCSD criterion G7 ('G7. Author or uploader request deletion'). Nick-D (talk) 00:30, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nick-D: The words "carbon copy" tells me that these images are identical to images that already exist. The author asserts tha tthey were copied from 3-D representations. Are you impying that the author was not telling the truth or do we have different udnerstandings of the ohrase "carbon copy". If you are old enough to remember the days when the office secretary used a typewriter to write letters, she [usually "she"] would take two or more pieces of paper (sometimes of different colours and/or qualities) and place a piece of carbon paper between each of them. The top copy was the copy that was sent to the receipient and the "carbon copy/copies" was/were the copy/copies that was kept in the office file[s]. Once the photocopier became a standard piece of office equipment, the need for "carbon copies" fell away. Does this explain my question? Martinvl (talk) 21:39, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- They are reproductions of images that are under copyright. I'm not sure that snide comments about a common phrase are really helpful here. Nick-D (talk) 09:51, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nick-D: The words "carbon copy" tells me that these images are identical to images that already exist. The author asserts tha tthey were copied from 3-D representations. Are you impying that the author was not telling the truth or do we have different udnerstandings of the ohrase "carbon copy". If you are old enough to remember the days when the office secretary used a typewriter to write letters, she [usually "she"] would take two or more pieces of paper (sometimes of different colours and/or qualities) and place a piece of carbon paper between each of them. The top copy was the copy that was sent to the receipient and the "carbon copy/copies" was/were the copy/copies that was kept in the office file[s]. Once the photocopier became a standard piece of office equipment, the need for "carbon copies" fell away. Does this explain my question? Martinvl (talk) 21:39, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Military insignia in the United States and in the United Kingdom are protected by trademark legislation. In addition British insignia are protected by copyright rules - however the official advice states "People are free to use MOD insignia for illustration purposes. For example, to include a regimental badge in a website such as Wikipedia for the purposes of describing in their own words what that regiment does." It therefore appears to me that as far as the US and UK are concerned, copies of military insignia may be placed in Commons.
- A few notes regarding Zimbabwean copyright law:
- Illustrations of banknotes and coins that have been demonetised are not subject to copyright. That suggests that military insignia that are no longer in use are also free of copyright, though the law is silent on that particular matter.
- Zimbabwe does have a copyright law regarding "Works of folklore" which has restrictions on the reproduction of "folk art. I do not believe that military insignia as part of "folk art".
- Since these drawing appear to be hand-drawn copies of 3-D insignia and in view of the above, I do not believe that they are subject to copyright law though they are probably subject to trade mark law.
- Finally, will User:Sprucecopse and User:Nick-D please examine each of these files individually to verify when each of the insignia came into existance as some of them pre-date 1973 and therfore the criteria "Rhodesia vectors after 1973" is incorrect. Martinvl (talk) 14:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for this information. The 7 Independent Company insignia is the insignia of the Rhodesia Regiment, but with a tricolor fabric behind it. I argued that it does not constitute enough of a difference from the copyright-free Rhodesia Regiment insignia for the 7 Independent Company insignia to not be copyright-free. I am unsure as to what other insignia of those previously named predate 1973, unless some of these insignia were used in similar contexts before they were properly established post-1973. Sprucecopse (talk) 20:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, it is not 100% sure these derivative works can be used with a free licence, deleted per uploader reqeust. Images are not in use on the projects. --Ellywa (talk) 22:43, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Low quality coat of arms Heraldrybranding (talk) 12:03, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep COM:INUSE —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per Mdaniels5757. --Ellywa (talk) 22:44, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Low quality coat of arms. Now it's more better at File:Escudo de Taboadela (Orense).svg. Heraldrybranding (talk) 12:05, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
- Keep COM:INUSE —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per Mdaniels5757. --Ellywa (talk) 22:45, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Of low quality and no real use anymore. Has been globally replaced by File:Escudo de Laroya (Almería).svg. Heraldrybranding (talk) 12:12, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Kept: no need to delete. Colors are different, possibly in use outside Wikimedia. --Ellywa (talk) 22:46, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Low quality image Heraldrybranding (talk) 12:31, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, black/white version of the other coat of arms. --Ellywa (talk) 22:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Unused low-quality crop of File:Egil Skallagrimsson 17c manuscript.jpg which is a low-quality scan to begin with, with wrong licensing information, not worth fixing. Gestumblindi (talk) 15:22, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, not in use on the projects. --Ellywa (talk) 22:48, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
and:
- File:2. ročník regionálnej konferencie cestoveného ruchu 2017 (37303583356).jpg
- File:2. ročník regionálnej konferencie cestoveného ruchu 2017 (37303583536).jpg
- File:2. ročník regionálnej konferencie cestoveného ruchu 2017 (37350430781).jpg
- File:2. ročník regionálnej konferencie cestoveného ruchu 2017 (37350431571).jpg
- File:2. ročník regionálnej konferencie cestoveného ruchu 2017 (37350432351).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Commons:Derivative works from presentation. Should be blanked/cropped to keep. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:55, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Nobody took the trouble to crop the images. --Ellywa (talk) 22:49, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:05, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Nimdzi Insights is mentioned in w:Association of Translation Companies. I'm not sure how relevant that is. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:59, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Can be undeleted if an article about the company - not yet written - needs an image. --Ellywa (talk) 22:51, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
COM:ADVERT , the ar:WP which was linked to this photo was currently removed for similar reasons. FuzzyMagma (talk) 16:38, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Question How is a picture of the International Olympic Committee Youth Ambassador of Sudan an ad? I don't see the notability issue for Commons. My question is whether there's a copyright issue. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:55, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek There is no copyright issues. It was uploaded by the person himself
- I will take anything written on the International youth federation website with a grain of salt, the information there is a copy past from Zaki website. He made WP (which was deleted) to make his claims legitimate. And the title of the picture is also intended to do that. He is not a Sudanese official in any capacity (his father was in the toppled previous Sudanese regime. I fact checked all of the positions he claims to be hold and all of them are either came from sources published by him or anonymous accounts (see refs). The only verifiable position he had was a communication associate in UNDP Sudan which is not equivalent to being an Ambassador by any measure
- He is clearly a fraudster, All I want to do here is to limit the legitimacy of his claims
- References:
- FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:09, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- I have no dog in that fight, but is www.iyfweb.org a fraudulent website? Also, which of the websites that you linked above is clearly fraudulent? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:39, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek no where that I claimed any of these websites are fraudulent per se, but the information there is a copy paste from the person website which cannot be verified. As for iyf website, go to the home page and make your own conclusions. Alot of stock images are used there.
- I’m claiming the person is a fraud
- PS: the fight here is for the integrity of Wikipedia, I am sure you have a dog or two. I don’t have a personal fight here. The information about him came when I sadly wanted to translate and expand his Arabic WP to add more Sudanese content to Wikipedia. FuzzyMagma (talk) 15:00, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- You've laid out your case eloquently. I'm content to leave the decision to the discretion of an admin. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:19, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- I have no dog in that fight, but is www.iyfweb.org a fraudulent website? Also, which of the websites that you linked above is clearly fraudulent? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:39, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, photo not in use since upload, it does not have educational value, is not in use and is therefore out of COM:SCOPE. --Ellywa (talk) 22:58, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
The artifacts raise doubt on the "own work" claim. COM:PCP. Veverve (talk) 16:41, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Can you explain in more detail? What "artifacts"? This looks like a typical work from a user who has created many similar heraldic images of moderate quality. 163.1.18.1 18:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- There are some artifacts in the lower part of the coat of arms. Veverve (talk) 18:37, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Standard artifacts from converting to a png to make the lower part transparent, seen on lots of other images from the same artist. Nothing to see here: move along please. 163.1.18.1 18:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- See the uploader's Heraldry Gallery [3] for the context. This image is entirely consistent with every other image on that page. 163.1.120.19 10:35, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Editor has a history of good-faith escutcheon uploads and a Graphic Designer's Barnstar. No valid reason given for deletion.
- There are some artifacts in the lower part of the coat of arms. Veverve (talk) 18:37, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Elizium23 (talk) 19:02, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no doubt on "own work" per Elizium and per discussion. --Ellywa (talk) 23:00, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Nice photo, but it's a vanity image, only used at en:User talk:Aaratrika Das Fayenatic london (talk) 16:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Comment If you think it's good enough, you could suggest keeping it and categorizing it as a portrait. I don't feel strongly either way. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- No, I think it should be deleted along with File:BBD.jpg, followed by en:User talk:Aaratrika Das under en:WP:U5. Fayenatic london (talk) 09:48, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- I have now deleted that user page under en:WP:NOTWEBHOST. Fayenatic london (talk) 10:23, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, of no educational value and therefore out of COM:SCOPE. --Ellywa (talk) 23:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation. It is marked as a self-made file, however, it looks like a screenshot from a flight simulator application. As such, it is likely copyright material, not created by the uploader. Cagliost (talk) 17:16, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:40, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Юрий Д.К. as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G7. Too old for G7, but I agree with deletion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. —howcheng {chat} 16:43, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by 151.47.177.232 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: copyvio|https://www.iochiamo.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/tv-infostrada.jpg. COM:TOO? —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:17, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Fairly creative to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:39, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. This is from an Italian company, and there is a relatively high threshold of originality there (see examples at COM:TOO Italy). IronGargoyle (talk) 01:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- i think that this is far above TOO Vale93b (talk) 17:40, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: TOO for Italy is very high and this does not appear to reach that bar. —howcheng {chat} 16:46, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Bedivere as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Copyright Benedicta Villarroel de Rubio. Does the license provided apply here? —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:18, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- It doesn't. It is not a work of the Chilean government. It is the work of Miguel Rubio (d. 1980). Their widow donated the archive to the Servicio Nacional de Patrimonio Cultural. Still, copyright would expire in 2051 (70 p. m. a.). See for more information Commons:Deletion requests/File:Raúl Sáez Sáez.jpg. Bedivere (talk) 20:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- It depends on whether the widow also transferred copyright to the government, like our Library of Congress has the Bain Collection and National Photo Company Collection with all rights. --RAN (talk) 02:19, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
- It would still be under copyright, because only materials generated by the Government were licensed in 2010 as CC-BY. Bedivere (talk) 17:39, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —howcheng {chat} 16:49, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
El archivo está creado a partir de un original con copyright y burdamente editado con Paint. Pero además, este escudo ya no corresponde con el escudo del obispo Osoro. Además, en los metadatos existe información personal que no quiero que aparezca (Ley española 3/2007). Marta.866 (talk) 20:58, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
- Archived in Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20190418233622/https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Escudo_Carlos_Osoro.jpg Brianjd (talk) 13:05, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Por favor, nadie está discutiendo sobre este archivo, y ya no se está utilizando. Además, su aparición y, sobretodo los datos que contiene, infringe varias leyes españolas y europeas, por lo que insisto en que sea borrada la imagen de la forma más rápida posible.
- Gracias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marta.866 (talk • contribs) 22:01, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Marta.866 What laws does its appearance violate? Brianjd (talk) 07:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Spanish Organic Law 3/2018, Spanish Law 3/2007, Judgment of the CJEU of 13th May 2014 - Marta.866 (talk) 07:26, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- And maybe Royal Legislative Decree 1/1996 - Marta.866 (talk) 07:28, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Spanish Organic Law 3/2018, Spanish Law 3/2007, Judgment of the CJEU of 13th May 2014 - Marta.866 (talk) 07:26, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Marta.866 What laws does its appearance violate? Brianjd (talk) 07:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —howcheng {chat} 16:51, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Archivo incumple con licencia de autor http://www.daleucampeon.com/universitario_de_deportes1934.htm Riebspace (talk) 04:54, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
No es un trabajo propio, además no registra un permiso de uso del autor/fotógrafo. Mismo archivo con menor resolución en miniatura, posible conflicto de copyright. http://www.daleucampeon.com/U_1934.jpg Edudelotus (talk) 06:30, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. As this is from 1934, it is clearly in the public domain per {{PD-Peru-photo}}. IronGargoyle (talk) 23:42, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - Unsure why we would keep this ridiculously small version (333 × 151) when we have File:Clubcampeon1934.jpg. It is so small as to be difficult to discern, which impairs educational utility. The "(U) Campeon 1934" in the latter appears original and to have been poorly photoshopped out of this version (see the lack of jpg compression in that area only, and obvious use of cloning tool). Эlcobbola talk 18:12, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —howcheng {chat} 16:56, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
_location_map_(1917_highlighited).svg){kind=link}
_location_map_(1917_highlighited).svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Usage of WC to promote war & terrorism. Most of so called "maps" made by this participant have nothing in common with history, legislative background from any point of internationall law. Additionally, the user from Russia has to be blocked for fake promotions against Ukraine. Alex Khimich (talk) 17:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
_location_map_(1917_highlighited).svg){kind=link}
- The next fantasies of the ukrainian invaders... It is terrorism promotion, right?:
- 2) The powers of the General Secretariat apply to the governorates of Kiev, Volyhnia, Podolsk, Poltava and Chernigov, with the exception of Mglinsky, Surazh, Starodubsky and Novozybkovsky districts (1917/08/17 Russian Provisional Government Directive) --Nicolay Sidorov (talk)
![[4]](https://telegra.ph/file/2f6aa242dd12269b211b6.png){kind=link}
![[5]](https://www.imbf.org/karty/images/karta-ukrainy-1917-1-hq.jpg){kind=link}
--Nicolay Sidorov (talk)
- Unsourced ("United States National Imagery and Mapping Agency data" and "World Data Base II data" contain the geographical data, not this shaded part), unused, probably fake. Delete. Wikisaurus (talk) 21:56, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Invalid reason: Commons can facilitate “promotion” of war/terrorism as long as it’s potentially educational. Here – I wouldn’t vow for that – educational usefulness is “this is how officially the RF recognized Ukraine’s borders.” ‑‑ Kays (T | C) 15:16, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- If kept for “this is how officially the RF recognized Ukraine’s borders.” then it should be appropriately renamed, and source provided. Note "Location map of Ukraine (1991–2014)" - as far as I know Russia is not (for now) claiming that it performed 2022 annexation in 1991. Also, last time I checked Russia failed to state what they actually annexed and claimed borders remain undefined, so this is guesswork at best. In the current state I suggest deleting it. Currently it is easy to recreate map, with misleading description, bad title and missing sources. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 00:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Also, see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nicolay_Sidorov - uploader was blocked for prowar propaganda lies and trolling Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 00:06, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ukraine_Historical_Borders.svg has some subtler manipulations Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 00:11, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Also, see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nicolay_Sidorov - uploader was blocked for prowar propaganda lies and trolling Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 00:06, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, per discussion. No reason for deletion of this file. According to the Deletion policy a supposedly incorrect, original researched or not-neutral file is not a reason for deletion. @Alex Khimich: you could consider to add {{Fact disputed}} to the file page, or one of the other more applicable warning templates listed on the template description. If more appropriate you may ask for renaming of the file or add a correct description. --Ellywa (talk) 21:20, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
_location_map_(1917_highlighited).svg){kind=link}
File:Qui zhijie, people who claimed to be messiah crowding history, 2015 (galleria continua).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The permissions on this image are misleading and seem incorrect - this is not a photograph of a monument in Italy as the license suggests, it is a photo of copyrighted art by a living artist (Qiu Zhijie) that was displayed inside an Italian museum featured in the Wiki Loves Monuments 2019 project. The artwork pictured was featured in the exhibition The End of the World (2016-2017) at the Centro per l'Arte Contemporanea Luigi Pecci, an interview with the artist by the museum in the run-up to this exhibition can be found here. Administrators should contact WikiItalia staff to confirm, but this seems like an incorrect use of the permissions granted by local authorities to photograph monuments and cultural sites otherwise covered by copyright. 19h00s (talk) 23:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellywa (talk) 21:22, 5 April 2023 (UTC)