Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2022/12/03
 |
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}
,_about_420-400_BC,_British_Museum_(14237128366).jpg){kind=link}
.jpeg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_-_Kosovo.jpg){kind=link}
_Buenos_Aires_03.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpeg){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}
![218 File:Трансформаторная будка "Энергетики городу". Нижний Новгород.jpg](#File:Трансформаторная_будка_"Энергетики_городу"._Нижний_Новгород.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![242 File:Le torpillage du "Falaba" Acte de féroce piraterie commis par un sous-marin allemand le 28 Mars 1915 dans le Canal St-Georges - - Sandy-Hook 15. LCCN2016651582.jpg](#File:Le_torpillage_du_"Falaba"_Acte_de_féroce_piraterie_commis_par_un_sous-marin_allemand_le_28_Mars_1915_dans_le_Canal_St-Georges_-_-_Sandy-Hook_15._LCCN2016651582.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP in South Africa. The crop fails de minimis A1Cafel (talk) 10:39, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: The South African law says that "The copyright in an artistic work shall not be infringed [...] if such work is permanently situated in a street, square or a similar public place.". The Stadium is on a public place. Blackcat 
10:50, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
File:Temple of Apollo Epikourios at Bassae (Greece), about 420-400 BC, British Museum (14237128366).jpg
[edit],_about_420-400_BC,_British_Museum_(14237128366).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_about_420-400_BC,_British_Museum_(14237128366).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Apparently this is a photo of a museum plate. There is no indication that the original photo, a work from of the Committee for the preservation of the temple, is available with compatible license, thus this derivative work should be deleted. C messier (talk) 10:49, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Butko (talk) 11:50, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
As it has a copyright issue SriniJosyula (talk) 10:31, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- {{subst:delete2|image=File:Srini Josyula.jpg|reason=As it has a copyright issue}} ~~~~ SriniJosyula (talk) 10:37, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
{{subst:delete2|image=File:Srini Josyula.jpg}}
Deleted: by Herbythyme. --Achim55 (talk) 15:42, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Bad Image Uploaded RetroAnkit (talk) 13:30, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 14:57, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Bag SVG Export, Sorry!!! RetroAnkit (talk) 13:38, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 14:56, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
This is a duplicate and inferior image of another I have already uploaded. It shows a woman’s leg. Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 17:15, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request, replaced by File:Top of Mt Gibraltar monument 2.jpg. --Achim55 (talk) 18:17, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope: advertising Headlock0225 (talk) 08:59, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Achim55 (talk) 21:37, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope: advertising Headlock0225 (talk) 09:00, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Achim55 (talk) 21:38, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Out of Scope: Upload directly advertising a service Enyavar (talk) 12:23, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Achim55 (talk) 21:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Subido por error Enthousiasmós (talk) 21:11, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 21:27, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Subido por error Enthousiasmós (talk) 21:11, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 21:28, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Yadhu Krishna BP (talk) 21:08, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Delete file does not exist. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:30, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: already some weeks ago. --Achim55 (talk) 11:35, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 01:33, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpeg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. Uploaded by mistake - obvious case of No FOP. -- Darwin Ahoy! 19:26, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpeg){kind=link}
I uploaded it by mistake Rekhakottoor (talk) 16:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 22:12, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Al*from*Lig (talk) 21:06, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 22:13, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
File:ATNACNE Token was born on September 10, 2021 with the aim of being-the largest decentralized project with a purpose..png
[edit]
I uploaded it by mistake ATNACNE (talk) 02:34, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 22:15, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 09.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 15:53, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 08:59, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 12.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 15:55, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 09:01, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 11.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 15:55, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 09:01, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 15.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 15:56, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 09:04, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 16 (cropped).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 15:56, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 09:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 16.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 15:56, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 09:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 13.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 15:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 09:02, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 14.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 15:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 09:04, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 02.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 15:59, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 08:51, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 05.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 15:59, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 08:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 03.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 16:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 08:52, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 04.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 16:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 08:52, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 07.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 16:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 08:56, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 08.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 16:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 08:58, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 租庇利街 Jubilee Street 中環街市 Central Market mall sign 足球世界杯 FIFA World Football Cup 模型 展覽 exhibition 足球場館 stadiums November 2022 Px3 01.jpg
[edit]
Exhibition are non-permanent display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 16:03, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion continued at Commons:Deletion requests/Qatar 2022 stadium models. AFC Vixen (talk) 08:50, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Low quality COM:NUDE photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 15:32, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Procedural close: File also nominated for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Uwe Kleins, for the same reason. Brianjd (talk) 13:16, 9 December 2022 (UTC) (non-admin closure)
Files uploaded by Esteban Garcia 16 (talk · contribs)
[edit]no idea what this is. com:out of scope. looks like test edits too.
- File:FNLP 5.jpg
- File:FNLP 6.jpg
- File:FNLP 7.jpg
- File:FNLP.jpg
- File:FNLP 2.jpg
- File:FNLP 4.jpg
- File:FNLP 3.jpg
RZuo (talk) 00:30, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Apparently related to the uploader organizing a watermelon throwing contest on his Wikipédia user page. Maybe he mistook Wikipédia for a web hosting service. He erased the page the same day ten years ago. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:14, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 01:08, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:10, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
File:I Won't Dirty My Hands - Poster Denouncing Serb Collaboration with Albanian Authorities - Mitrovica (Serb Side) - Kosovo.jpg
[edit]_-_Kosovo.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_Kosovo.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 01:52, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:12, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 01:53, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:12, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 01:53, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:12, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 01:53, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:13, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 01:53, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:13, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 01:54, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:13, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 01:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:13, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 01:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 01:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
_Buenos_Aires_03.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Buenos_Aires_03.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for 2D works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 02:00, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
_Buenos_Aires_03.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
_Buenos_Aires_03.JPG){kind=link}
No FoP for 2D works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 02:00, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:15, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D(+3D) works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 02:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:15, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 02:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:15, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 02:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 02:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 02:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 02:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:18, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 02:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:18, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 02:05, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:18, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Map of a fictional election used only in an enwiki sandbox that is up for speedy deletion. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:46, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:19, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Map of a fictional election used only in an enwiki sandbox that is up for speedy deletion. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:46, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:19, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Map of a fictional election used only in an enwiki sandbox that is up for speedy deletion. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:47, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:20, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Map of a fictional election used only in an enwiki sandbox that is up for speedy deletion. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:47, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:20, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP in Ukraine. Monuments by Vladimir Kishkan (died in 2008) and Mikhail Iakovlevitch Ksenevitch (unknown) A1Cafel (talk) 03:50, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 04:37, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:25, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 04:38, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:25, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
probably copyrighted Veracious (talk) 04:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:25, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
probably copyrighted, also a spam Veracious (talk) 04:41, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:26, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
probably copyrighted, also a spam Veracious (talk) 04:41, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:26, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
probably copyrighted, also a spam Veracious (talk) 04:42, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:26, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 04:45, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:26, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyright infringement. I found the picture here: https://lifeglobe.net/entry/4708. It was uploaded there before November 2013. --Lukas Beck (talk) 14:29, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 00:06, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
2013 Migrant workers photos
[edit]- File:Migrant worker photo 1 2013.tif
- File:Migrant workers photo 2 2013.tif
- File:Migrant workers photo 3 2013.tif
Suspicious own-work claim. User is a university student in 2022 (see their userpage on enwiki) but claims own work on images that were (per their titles) taken in 2013. Furthermore, these are digital photographs of what are clearly physical images - if they were truly own-work, the user would have the original files and would have uploaded those. Premeditated Chaos (talk) 04:52, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:28, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST.
Mitte27 (talk) 04:53, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:29, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 05:03, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:29, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 05:17, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:30, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 05:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:30, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
ordinary person Mateus2019 (talk) 05:42, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:31, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
ordinary person Mateus2019 (talk) 05:43, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Yep. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:24, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:31, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
unused, generic description, no educational use Pibwl (talk) 20:45, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:54, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
out of scope Trade (talk) 21:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Comment Nice staircase, so could be kept if we knew where it was, but otherwise, delete. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:40, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:53, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Raw text curriculum vitae, out of scope. Achim55 (talk) 21:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:52, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
COPYVIO - page clearly asserts copyright. This upload does not set out how the right to upload to Commons is achieved. 2.31.200.187 22:06, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:52, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
COPYVIO - the source page clearly asserts copyright. No info given here as to why the image can be uploaded to commons. 10mmsocket (talk) 22:08, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:52, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Túrelio as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=3110854209138315&set=pcb.3110854235804979 DMacks (talk) 23:13, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Uploader claims to be the photographer. That would possibly make them the license-owner, depending on the arrangement they made with the subject. But the tagger notes that it's on facebook, which the uploader notes is of the subject not the of the photographer. Sounds like we need a VRT filing to confirm license ownership and release. DMacks (talk) 23:16, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:51, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Túrelio as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=3110854205804982&set=ecnf.100069830271976 DMacks (talk) 23:13, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Uploader claims to be the photographer. That would possibly make them the license-owner, depending on the arrangement they made with the subject. But the tagger notes that it's on facebook, which the uploader notes is of the subject not the of the photographer. Sounds like we need a VRT filing to confirm license ownership and release. DMacks (talk) 23:16, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 00:51, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Marialopezzz21 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of the project scope. Promotional. No source.
Edslov (talk) 00:47, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:32, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Summary said this is extracted from a A4 poster, also appears to be a historical work, proper license and permission is required A1Cafel (talk) 01:56, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:31, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by BlueStrawBear (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST.
Mitte27 (talk) 04:36, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:30, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 04:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:30, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Appears to be a news photo, ssee https://sol.sapo.pt/artigo/715688/jogador-do-sporting-ristovski-revela-que-acusou-positivo-em-teste-a-covid-19 Adeletron 3030 (talk) 05:52, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:29, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by PaytonSampleo (talk · contribs)
[edit]Work of a third-party artist, need COM:VRT ticket.
Adeletron 3030 (talk) 06:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:29, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 06:04, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:29, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 06:05, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:28, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 06:06, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:28, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 06:11, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:28, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 06:13, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:28, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 06:15, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:28, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 06:18, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:28, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 06:46, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:27, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
not notable. Self-promotion. Crosswiki spam from Wikidata Estopedist1 (talk) 07:00, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Agreed. Not notable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:23, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:27, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:14, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:26, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Photograph of a photograph. The original creator is unknown. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:27, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:26, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 07:29, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:26, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Sources of the images are unknown. Possible copyvio. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:31, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Ok. Thanks. Zkarapatlak (talk) 07:52, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:26, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Promotional image, lack of educational value. Nanahuatl (talk) 08:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:25, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 2409:4073:4E11:D0DC:F47D:AF8B:FBF9:3814 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No metadata for own work.
Converted to regular DR, as rationale is rather weak and search for external hits did not yield a result. -- Túrelio (talk) 09:03, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- If we can't find any evidence of this image elsewhere on the web, we should keep it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:15, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete (not for copyvio), unless evidence is provided for own work. If this is someone else's image, it would be unethical to attest it without evidence. Additionally, the building depicted does not look "ancient" as they claimed.--117.230.90.28 13:46, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- If the image is nowhere else to be found online, why should we not AGF in the claim that it is the uploader's own work? We don't require every photo to go through VRT to avoid deletion. Agreed that it doesn't look ancient. Maybe they meant merely "old," from their point of view. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:53, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:24, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Da es sich hier um eine zeitlich begrenzte Ausstellung handeln dürfte, ist die Panoramafreiheit hier leider nicht anwendbar.-- Túrelio (talk) 10:24, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:23, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
As the depicted windows are photographed obviously from indoors, freedom-of-panorama exception of Germany is not applicable here.-- Túrelio (talk) 10:33, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Similar problem: File:Kanzel Scheidental.jpg
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:23, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Some doubt about "own work" as metadata contain Facebook/Instagram-code. -- Túrelio (talk) 10:54, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Depicts a sculpture by living artists Francioni e Mastromarino[1], thereby violating their copyright. -- Túrelio (talk) 11:00, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Not own work and copyright violation. EXIF shows copyright of Alexander Ivanov - MASTERAL. Сале (talk) 11:04, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Small size, lacks EXIF data, a very similar photo is here. Possible copyvio. C messier (talk) 11:05, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Two simple logos, but why they must be on the same file? Out of project scope? Taivo (talk) 11:41, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Alexander Vika
[edit]This 1968 medal is the work of Slovak sculptor sk:Alexander Vika, born in 1933 and apparently still alive, so it is not in the public domain yet, and the files should be deleted. They can be restored 70 years after Vika's death.
Rosenzweig τ 12:05, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Neither CC-BY-SA, nor public domain. Image published in several sites on the internet (e.g. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Figura-2-fotografia-aerea-do-Campus-Universitario-Morro-do-Cruzeiro-UFOP-Ouro_fig1_350850779). Py4nf (talk) 12:52, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:20, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Adel khajavi (talk) 14:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:20, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Le photographe Georges BIARD m'a envoyé le message me déclarant que l'actrice l'avait contacté afin de retirer cette photo. J'ai la capture de la discussion si nécessaire. Bien cordialement. Durkheim21 (talk) 14:43, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Keep image sous licence libre. Aucune raison de la supprimer. --Shev123 (talk) 16:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Didym (talk) 01:19, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by MusicBoyzz (talk · contribs)
[edit]Copyright violation (see https://www.discogs.com/artist/7854337-Jugobeat) + Out of scope - SD|F10 (personal photos by non-contributors)
JopkeB (talk) 15:07, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation, see https://www.who.com.au/logies-2022-red-carpet-best-looks JopkeB (talk) 15:13, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation see https://www.deezer.com/en/artist/141359972 JopkeB (talk) 15:15, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:16, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation see https://www.gettyimages.nl/detail/nieuwsfoto%27s/alli-simpson-attends-opening-night-of-mary-poppins-at-the-nieuwsfotos/1399328856?adppopup=true JopkeB (talk) 15:18, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:16, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Low quality COM:NUDE photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 15:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:16, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Out-of-scope Selfy. Pierre cb (talk) 16:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:15, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Out-of-scope selfy. Pierre cb (talk) 16:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:15, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Out-of-scope selfy. Pierre cb (talk) 16:20, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:15, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Only used in a promotional draft on en.wiki that has been deleted. Clearly a professional photo done in a studio, ambiguous copyright status. Liz (talk) 16:27, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Extremely small and unused image, can be replaced by alternatives in the category A1Cafel (talk) 16:28, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
I found the photo on the Prime Minister of India's Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/narendramodi/posts/828635831963984/ — Sunnya343✈ (háblame • my work) 16:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No educational use + probably copyvio Drakosh (talk) 16:45, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
This photo was not made by Kevin Pabst himself, who is holding and playing a trumpet. So the licence self is wrong. 2003:E0:F70F:B700:2941:D194:20E4:4EC0 17:15, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:13, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
This photo was not by Kevin Pabst himself who is holding a trumpet in one hand and has one hand in his trouser's pocket. So the licence self is obviously wrong. 2003:E0:F70F:B700:2941:D194:20E4:4EC0 17:17, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:13, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Image is a hoax made up of several other images - being used on a hoax submission on English Wikipedia KylieTastic (talk) 17:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:13, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Probable copyright violation. It would seem to me that the copyright belongs to the Windor Headlock0225 (talk) 17:57, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:12, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Images from the British Museum. Only under a non commercial license. No permission.
- File:Medallion of Licinius II, British Museum (obverse).png
- File:Medallion of Licinius II, British Museum.png
- File:Coin of Majorian, British Museum (obverse).png
- File:Coin of Majorian, British Museum.png
- File:Medallion of Constantius I, British Museum (2) (obverse).png
- File:Aureus of Trajan, British Museum.png
- File:Aureus of Galba, British Museum.png
- File:Medallion of Constantius I, British Museum (2).png
- File:Medallion of Constantius I, British Museum (obverse).png
- File:Medallion of Constantius I, British Museum.png
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(obverse).png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Yann (talk) 18:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry if I misunderstood something. I saw the text "The image will be released to you under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) license" [2] so I thought that I wouldn't have problems. Tintero21 (talk) 20:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Sadly, Commons requires commercial permission. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:52, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry if I misunderstood something. I saw the text "The image will be released to you under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) license" [2] so I thought that I wouldn't have problems. Tintero21 (talk) 20:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:12, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
unused, uncat, no ency value Pibwl (talk) 19:34, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:11, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
unused, no description, no ency value Pibwl (talk) 19:35, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:11, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Probably screenshot of non-free video Patrik L. (talk) 19:44, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:11, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Image appears with same clouds in a 2021 Facebook post, https://www.facebook.com/GoNuapada/posts/nuapadas-best-architectural-marvel-sinapali-jagannath-templecount-your-blessings/2602366529888665/ Belbury (talk) 20:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:10, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
This is not used on any pages, and as it is just a digitally aged photo of Jon Ossoff is unlikely to be off any use.
It is also Out of Scope as it is not realistically useful for an educational purpose as again it is just a photo edit. The description of 'fake image for thing' affirms this. Nordrhein-Westfalen-CanlntoSpace (talk) 20:30, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:10, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Random photo - unused, no description, no cat, no educational use Pibwl (talk) 20:32, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- "unused, no description, no cat" aren't valid reason of delete. And a deletion requester should justify why it has no educational use. Matlin (talk) 11:24, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- I always thought, that the uploader should at least add appropriate category, if he thinks, that the photo is useful. I can justify: I can't see any realistic educational use of such random shot. Pibwl (talk) 19:30, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: now categorized, in scope. --Didym (talk) 01:09, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Random blurred photo of no use Pibwl (talk) 20:35, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:02, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Random photo of a bed, no educational use Pibwl (talk) 20:35, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:02, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Bad photograph with no description and no realistic educational use Pibwl (talk) 20:36, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:02, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
File:-Open4Us Panel @cgreen, Kim Larson, Sam Johnston, Connie Broughton -taaccct (9095865113).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No description, no cat, no apparent educational use Pibwl (talk) 20:39, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:02, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
File:-oucel12 @terguy MOOCs, Walled Gardens, Analytics and Network Multi-generation pedagogical innovations -visual notes- (7700202066).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unused, no description, no cat, no apparent educational use Pibwl (talk) 20:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:02, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
unused, some autopromo logo Pibwl (talk) 20:41, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:01, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
unused, no useful description, no cat, out of scope Pibwl (talk) 20:43, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Comment I did a Google image search, but the problem is, various buildings around the world look like this. That said, maybe someone can identify this one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:44, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 01:01, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
As the description indicates, this image was submitted to NASA by another Instagram user. It is therefore not in public domain. Ixfd64 (talk) 06:44, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 04:58, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
As the description indicates, this image was submitted to NASA by another Instagram user. It is therefore not in public domain. Ixfd64 (talk) 06:45, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 04:58, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Unused personal image, out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:20, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 04:57, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
derivative of package-artwork, per Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Product packaging. -- Túrelio (talk) 09:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- If the problem is Cars characters, make a pixeled version of this items or a blanked back. museo8bits (talk) 23:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Same problem with:
- File:V.Smile Motion Cars 001.jpg
- File:V.Smile Motion Cars 002.jpg
- File:V.Smile Motion Cars 003.jpg
- File:V.Smile Motion Cars 007.jpg
Deleted: per nomination, problem is not just with copyrighted characters, but also packaging images as a whole. --IronGargoyle (talk) 04:50, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Full size version: File:Smiling on the beach with a yellow bikini.jpg Solomon203 (talk) 14:05, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. No reason to delete a crop, which is used in multiple articles. The original might be handy too, but it has excessive headspace. Materialscientist (talk) 22:26, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --IronGargoyle (talk) 04:46, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Contains inaccurate, unsourced information 83.250.196.20 15:17, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Clarification: This map (posted in august of 2011) is taken from an original USGS map and modified. Many of the modifications appear spurious and all are unsourced.
All the dark blue Large Igneous Provinces, or "LIPs", drawn in are made by hand by the user with the handle "Williamsborg". That is clear in several ways - they don't appear on the original legend, they are obviously drawn using a simple coloring tool and are either elongated ovals or series of circles - they don't follow any geologic boundaries.
Second problem is, most of those are not recognized by any geologic authority, as far as I can tell. And some seem to be complete misunderstandings.
Take what is labeled as "North Atlantic LIP" on *this* map. There is a recognized NALIP - and it is already drawn in!
It is Iceland and the corresponding purple "spot" in southeast Greenland. User Williamsborg have added superfluous blue ovals partly covering the real NALIP - and adding one part in the middle of the Norwegian coast where there is none!
(That part of Norway is not the "Western Norway", or Vestlandet, that is referenced to have residual traces of NALIP in the wikipedia entry for the same. Norwegian geologist don't seem to recognize any instances of basalts in that part of the country, as far as I can tell.)
That in itself is clearly vandalism - it distorts the extent of the NALIP and fly in the face of established geology.
This map is highly inaccurate, contains invented and unrecogized information contradicting reputed sources. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.250.196.20 (talk) 15:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep: In use. Content problems are not deletion reasons for a file that is in use. Start a discussion on the file's talk page. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:54, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --IronGargoyle (talk) 04:38, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
junk worthless Slinkyw (talk) 21:46, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:37, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --IronGargoyle (talk) 04:30, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
junk worthless Slinkyw (talk) 21:46, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:37, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --IronGargoyle (talk) 04:29, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Per Section 3.a.3 of CC-BY-SA 4.0, You must remove any of the information required by Section 3(a)(1)(A) to the extent reasonably practicable. Slinkyw (talk) 22:18, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Slinkyw: If I am interpreting your request correctly, you are not requesting that the image be deleted. You are requesting that you no longer be attributed as the creator of the image. Is that right? IronGargoyle (talk) 12:20, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Kept: This file was licensed under the CC0 Public Domain Dedication, which has no such requirement. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
junk worthless Slinkyw (talk) 21:46, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:37, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --IronGargoyle (talk) 04:29, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
junk worthless Slinkyw (talk) 21:46, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep In scope and geolocated. You could make your files more useful by adding categories and improving file descriptions, but why do you want to junk them? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:36, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --IronGargoyle (talk) 04:29, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
junk worthless Slinkyw (talk) 21:46, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep A geolocated picture of part of a shore is "worthless"? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:34, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --IronGargoyle (talk) 04:28, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Burj Khalifa was completed in 2010 by Adrian Smith (still alive), there is no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates, thus permission from him is required A1Cafel (talk) 01:12, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 01:13, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 01:15, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP in UAE. The image focus too much on the modern buildings, not a general skyline view A1Cafel (talk) 01:17, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 01:20, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpeg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpeg){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 01:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP in Qatar. The image focus too much on the modern building, not a general skyline view A1Cafel (talk) 01:25, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 01:27, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 01:27, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 01:29, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 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 the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 01:39, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 01:39, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 01:41, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 01:42, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 01:43, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Qatar A1Cafel (talk) 01:49, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in Azerbaijan A1Cafel (talk) 02:07, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for 2D works in Japan A1Cafel (talk) 03:26, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
No FoP for 3D works in Russia. No proof that artist L.V. Tazba has been dead for 70 years A1Cafel (talk) 03:57, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Bahrain A1Cafel (talk) 04:06, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 04:14, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 10:35, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:09, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
The photo is not own work, but taken from newspaper. When and where it was published? If source country is Spain, then {{PD-Spain-photo}} likely applies, but if source country is another country, then the photo is likely copyrighted. Taivo (talk) 12:08, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:09, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Uploads by Rednasberg
[edit]- File:Bucha 6503C9BA-520E-428E-A7E4-49EE0674FBCE.jpg
- File:Bucha 1810C943-DD8D-49BF-A477-D2DD28C77544.jpg
- File:Bucha 4E392375-476E-44E7-9165-B96F33E501B5.jpg
- File:Bucha A5100933-70F0-49FE-B574-834C75D4C353.jpg
- File:Bucha C7255733-5EDF-4F52-BDAD-DFFA9319CA66.jpg
- File:Chernigiv 96E0ECBE-A3FB-4F84-B39E-6FC79CC2125D.jpg
- File:Chernigiv 5BE94BB5-71EA-4C06-8ED7-6969C9AC295C.jpg
- File:Chernigiv 9AC03B34-282F-4821-B0F3-99F3F33B5726.jpg
- File:Chernigiv A894EC79-759D-4F75-8FE7-C0FB028D6EF6.jpg
- File:Chernigiv 6545D94E-A171-4768-B71F-D13FCCA89929.jpg
- File:Chernigiv C4AE7832-F48A-4DAA-9D29-522299F4A761.jpg
- File:Chernigiv CC65914A-5984-4654-8CE6-6F36B7D96DA9.jpg
- File:Chernigiv D8EA5665-688B-4B9E-8B36-00A7C8DE2BC8.jpg
- File:Chernigiv D295A8E0-1E91-4B8E-B63C-4E2828621D06.jpg
- File:Kharkiv 0486104A-DBE8-435A-A7CE-ACEC7669A8F0.jpg
- File:Kharkiv B04516C8-D0D9-4947-9F53-841D809E7EAE.jpg
- File:Kharkiv C52F6DDB-E5D0-4552-ACB2-4B8282A4802F.jpg
- File:Kharkiv 8B22AF63-C532-4BB7-9A6D-ABB1835592BC.jpg
- File:Kiyv 01F7883F-A858-4A60-B714-001572969870 1 105 c.jpg
- File:Kiyv 4C167771-428F-4922-BD23-B4A6C586F8A2 1 105 c.jpg
- File:Kiyv 9A537725-EDF7-444B-9DD6-D41E8498695A.jpg
- File:Kiyv 7071299E-2129-4F4C-B66C-F7E1ECAFBE6E 1 105 c.jpg
- File:Kiyv 16EA9352-DBCB-4880-AACD-71FCCF07FCAC 1 105 c.jpg
- File:Kiyv 9166EC41-A4A4-4B56-9B8D-D0EDB0901859 1 105 c.jpg
- File:Kiyv BE330DC2-E0B7-48FB-A974-CC9334D77F1B.jpg
- File:Lviv 65C1E24E-7CB1-4EC8-8BD7-B7685E87475A.jpg
- File:Lviv 67E7FA3F-0F8E-4438-AEA6-D3D7A4A28A74.jpg
- File:Lviv 04ED5B40-D70C-41FA-B007-9ECB664DE653.jpg
- File:Lviv 357D03BC-F06E-4C0B-B42A-7B0473F44266.jpg
- File:Lviv 091D932B-1998-4F80-883F-9FB72624BA8E.jpg
- File:Lviv 303DB049-0445-4B76-BA24-CEB5F9026875.jpg
- File:Lviv 05238F55-DADC-4283-BFFD-F1F91F1E9BF8.jpg
- File:Lviv C4D61B73-B060-4789-80D3-7C107F5B3D2E.jpg
- File:Lviv C23E0B0F-428E-46BA-970F-8EEA08BFD2EF.jpg
- File:Lviv E8DAFA03-E162-4303-A935-C7D28367AAA8.jpg
- File:Lviv E965E2F5-83BF-47D7-8267-5C07A20297B9.jpg
- File:Lviv F7AA1678-D06E-45B1-95C8-401881EA19B8.jpg
- File:Lviv 5688F477-9B0C-4CD5-A2ED-FD27AD5AA1ED.jpg
Images where collected via the Ukrainian Witness project, and uploaded to Commons for their WikiTruth project. Licensing and conditions for uploading on the first website are unclear, so reuse through Wikimedia Commons is as well. Agency has been informed about our policies on licensing but have not followed up in the last 14 days. Pinging Ahonc to make sure I did not miss any VRTS ticket about this in the UA queue (and fyi). --Ciell (talk) 00:17, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Twundy as Fair use (Fairuse). PD-textlogo? —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:44, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: textlogo. --Krd 06:15, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
The building was just completed in 2022. There is no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates, permission from the architect is required.
A1Cafel (talk) 01:07, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all per nom. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:30, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Non capisco se e' legale Stefano79x (talk) 01:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- E un vecchio castello. Perche sei dubioso? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:32, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- I don't know if it is possible without permission.
- Non so se e' consentito. Pensavo ci fossero già i permessi
- Please delete
- Thank you Stefano79x (talk) 13:39, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- What's the permission issue? Did you photograph on privately-owned ground? Because the remnants of this castle certainly would not be under copyright. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:48, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no reason. --Krd 06:16, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Non capisco se è legale Stefano79x (talk) 01:20, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Perche? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:31, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- I don't know if it is possible without permission.
- Please delete
- Thank you Stefano79x (talk) 13:37, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no reason. --Krd 06:16, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Non capisco se è legale Stefano79x (talk) 01:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Question What would be the problem? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:31, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- I don't know if it is possible without permission.
- Please delete
- Thank you Stefano79x (talk) 13:37, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no reason. --Krd 06:16, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Image was overexposed, unlikely to be educationally useful A1Cafel (talk) 01:48, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The one man with his face turned toward the camera is usable if he's a famous person and we don't have similar photos of better quality. I agree that this photo is very overexposed and washed out, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:28, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
So small it seems not to have any use at all. And I also doubt it to be own work of the uploader (probably a NASA’s photograph and therefore already on Commons). RodRabelo7 (talk) 03:12, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:17, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 3D works in Russia. Artist Olivier Strebelle died in 2017, still within the 70 p.m.a. of the country A1Cafel (talk) 03:55, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- I strongly object to this nomination, since the main subject of this photo is the fountain and not the sculpture, which can hardly be seen at night. "Russian jurisprudence states that no infringement is constituted when the work is an "accessory compared to the main represented or handled subject". --Leonid Dzhepko (talk) 23:01, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:18, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
NoFop in France (ces statues sont l'œuvre du sculpteur Charles Machet décédé en 1980. https://www.charlesmachet.com/annonciation) Poudou99 (talk) 04:47, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:18, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Apparently this is a photo of a museum plate. There is no indication that the original photo is available with compatible license, thus this derivative work should be deleted. C messier (talk) 07:07, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:19, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Apparently this is a photo of a museum plate. There is no indication that the original photo is available with compatible license, thus this derivative work should be deleted. C messier (talk) 07:08, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:19, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Lack of source. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:14, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: source is given. --Krd 06:20, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1977 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:15, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:20, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1993 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:18, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1993 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1993 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1993 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:20, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1982 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:20, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1972 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:20, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1968 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1972 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1974 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1975 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1988 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1975 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1972 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1979 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:23, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1964 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:24, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1985 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:24, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1968 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:24, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1968 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:25, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1975 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:25, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1987 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:26, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1988 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:28, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighed artwork. The creator died in 1977 and that doesn't make it a PD. Nanahuatl (talk) 07:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:22, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Likely not own work, as these diagrams are correctly captioned in English but uploaded with names like "Asdssadasdasdasdasdasd.jpg". File:Asadasdsdf.jpg and File:Asadasd51.jpg have been separately flagged as copyright violations, being taken from a scientific paper which didn't release its content as CC-Attribution (and the uploader's name doesn't match the name on the paper),
- File:Qqqqqq0221.jpg
- File:Asdssadasdasdasdasdasd.jpg
- File:Sa1515612.jpg
- File:Sa2w6esda.jpg
- File:Ss5456sssss.jpg
- File:Atmo 10214s.tif
Lord Belbury (talk) 11:05, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:16, 19 November 2022 (UTC)
Diagrams in different styles likely taken from academic papers, per previous discussion. These uploads were mixed with diagrams taken from a 2019 CC-BY paper without crediting the authors, which I have reattributed to that that source.
- File:Era5 data.jpg
- File:Teneaw.jpg
- File:Tene.jpg
- File:Seas0110.tif
- File:Reflection0010013s.tif
- File:Reflection0010013.tif
- File:Emre Havazl.tif
- File:Ppt file Seminar 28.jpg
- File:Ppt file Seminar 24.jpg
- File:Ppt file Seminar 21.tif
- File:Ppt file Seminar 2.tif
- File:Ionosphere Troposphere dGNSS 0.png
- File:Newsss 155.png
- File:Satte0301.tif
Belbury (talk) 12:46, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 15:47, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Duplicates of File:Aaaa1w.jpg with different font sizes, the uploader presumably making corrections and uploading each one as a new image. None of these earlier versions are in use.
Belbury (talk) 17:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:23, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Profile photo extracted from a telephone interview, unlikely to be a work from VOA A1Cafel (talk) 03:36, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:34, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in Russia A1Cafel (talk) 03:57, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Здравствуйте, уважаемый пользователь A1Cafel. С удивлением для себя обнаружил, что мое фото номинировано на удаление. Я сделал эту фотографию сам. Может вы подумали, что я сказал, что сделал этот стрит-арт? Нет, я только сделал фото. Может быть некорректно описал это фото? Может быть запрещено делать фотографию этого изображения на трансформаторной будке? Или может быть надо было найти создателя этого стрит-арта и спросить разрешения? Хотя вроде бы это сооружение находится в общественном месте и не имеет табличек и надписей, что нельзя фотографировать. Надеюсь на понимание. А.Чурушкин Aleksey Churushkin (talk) 17:49, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- Permission from the artist is required. Krd 08:35, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:35, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Freedom of panorama (i.e taking pictures of buildings or anything which is protected by copyright) is not allowed in Bahrain, FOP is allowed only for incidental inclusions (Not primary subject) For more information see Current FOP situation ...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 12:27, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Oh, goodness. This is a cityscape, and not a derivative work of any individual building. City skylines are not derivative works. This is a clear case. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:39, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Kept Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:26, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
CC-BY-NC-ND license on Flickr A1Cafel (talk) 04:07, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. I can verify from deleted revisions that this was originally uploaded to English Wikipedia by the creator and owner of the Flickr stream linked. The upload to English Wikipedia was made under the less restrictive Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license. IronGargoyle (talk) 16:15, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as Commons doesn't host photos with such tags. --SHB2000 (talk) 00:51, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- But the creator did upload the image to English Wikipedia using the CC-BY-SA license. Having the license on Flickr as CC-BY-NC-ND doesn't change that. Creative Commons licenses are non-revokable. IronGargoyle (talk) 01:20, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per IronGargoyle. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep as it isn't licensed as CC-BY-NC-ND here. Photographers are free to release work to different parties under different licences. For instance, a photo might be uploaded to a commercial site under a NC licence intially then later, when the photographer decides that there is little chance of selling the photo, it is uploaded here under a different licence. AlasdairW (talk) 22:58, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Krd 08:36, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
There is no freedom of panorama in Lithuania and the photo violates architect's copyright. Taivo (talk) 11:11, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:37, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Marcel Rau
[edit]These are medals designed by Belgian medallist nl:Marcel Rau, who died in 1966. So they are not in the public domain yet and should be deleted. The files can be restored when they are in the public domain in both Belgium and the United States. For the 1928/29 medal and the ca. 1940 medal that should be the case in 2037; for the 1958 medal, it's 2054.
- File:Balthasar-Vladimir-14leopold.jpg
- File:Glimpse Of The Garden0001.jpg
- File:Médaille Leopoldus III Rex (avers).jpg
- File:Médaille Leopoldus III Rex (revers).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Rosenzweig τ 11:19, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:37, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
- also file:برج سيهات.jpg
There is no freedom of panorama in Saudi Arabia and the photos violates architects' copyright. Taivo (talk) 11:31, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:43, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Duplicate of File:Flag of Israel.svg. Fry1989 eh? 14:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: in use. --Krd 08:43, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Distorted duplicate of File:Flag of Israel.svg. Not in use. Fry1989 eh? 16:54, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Materialscientist (talk) 08:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation from https://www.fastweb.it/corporate/ VadErs88 (talk) 15:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:43, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 16:14, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Could you explain what you mean by FOP? Besides that in Swizterland a political poster used on public grounds and photographed as thus can be reproduced without any problems. Besides that: I have all the rights to the poster. As the president of GomS (Gesellschaft offene & moderne Schweiz), I made the poster together with Ana Roldán, I had it printed and only the hanging was then paid by the Swiss Business Organization Economie Suisse. So your deletion request is nonsense. But I would still like to learn what FOP means? Greetings from SwitzerlandHaemmerli (talk) 22:12, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Switzerland#Freedom of panorama. --Krd 08:39, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unused, no cat, no useful descripton, no realistic educational use Pibwl (talk) 20:38, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:39, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
random photo of a ceiling during political meeting, out of scope Pibwl (talk) 20:42, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Comment Balloons and floodlights on the ceiling are in scope to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:45, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:40, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
File:Plaque commemorating completion of Audkey Causeway, Royal National Park, New South Wales.jpg
[edit]
No need for redirect - spelling error Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 21:06, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:40, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Flags of provinces of Zambia
[edit]Unsourced flags. They look fictitious, very likely a hoax.
- File:CentralFlagZM.svg
- File:CentralFlagZM.png
- File:CopperbeltFlagZM.png
- File:EasternFlagZM.svg
- File:EasternFlagZM.png
- File:LuapulaFlagZM.svg
- File:LuapulaFlagZM.jpg
- File:LusakaFlagZM.png
- File:NorthernFlagZM.svg
- File:NorthernFlagZM.png
- File:MuchingaFlagZM.svg
- File:MuchingaFlagZM.png
- File:NorthWesternFlagZM.svg
- File:NorthWesternFlagZM.png
- File:SouthernFlagZM.svg
- File:SouthernFlagZM.png
- File:WesternFlagZM.svg
- File:WesternFlagZM.png
Flagvisioner (talk) (contribs) 
01:30, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: most are in use. --Krd 08:41, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Flags of provinces of Zambia
[edit]Why should it matter that they are in use? They are fictional and provide no educational value, and are likely created as a hoax. Please see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
- File:CentralFlagZM.svg
- File:CentralFlagZM.png
- File:CopperbeltFlagZM.png
- File:EasternFlagZM.svg
- File:EasternFlagZM.png
- File:LuapulaFlagZM.svg
- File:LuapulaFlagZM.jpg
- File:LusakaFlagZM.png
- File:NorthernFlagZM.svg
- File:NorthernFlagZM.png
- File:MuchingaFlagZM.svg
- File:MuchingaFlagZM.png
- File:NorthWesternFlagZM.svg
- File:NorthWesternFlagZM.png
- File:SouthernFlagZM.svg
- File:SouthernFlagZM.png
- File:WesternFlagZM.svg
- File:WesternFlagZM.png
Flagvisioner (talk) 04:22, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep COM:INUSE triumphs your concerns. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:05, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- They are not realistically useful for an education purpose, besides in noting an example of a fictional flag. They might be on Wikipedia pages about the provinces, but that does not make then real, rather misleading people who read those articles. Which makes them not legitimately in use, doesn't it? Flagvisioner (talk) 01:08, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- We should contact the Zambian government for provide the real ones. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 10:00, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- They are not realistically useful for an education purpose, besides in noting an example of a fictional flag. They might be on Wikipedia pages about the provinces, but that does not make then real, rather misleading people who read those articles. Which makes them not legitimately in use, doesn't it? Flagvisioner (talk) 01:08, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: in use. --Krd 07:33, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
Image from National Portrait Gallery (London) uploaded in 2010 with a false claim of own work. Image is by Walter Stoneman, who contributed over 18 thousand works to the gallery. As a UK artist working for a UK gallery, Stoneman's work is normally suject to 70 pma. Stoneman died in 1958, meaning that copyright will remain in force until at least 1 January 2029. None of the exceptions recorded in Category:Photographs by Walter Stoneman appear to apply to this situation. From Hill To Shore (talk) 11:36, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per COM:UK#Known author (Walter Stoneman). ᴀlbanɢeller (talk) 19:14, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Kadı Message 19:15, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
There are no sources indicating the use of this coat of arms. It is probably an original proposal for the coat of arms of Kostuchna MacQtosh (talk) 22:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- In which way is this a reason for deletion? Krd 08:42, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Kadı Message 18:03, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to have verifiably have been published, in fact probably wasn't, before 1868, see [3] Eddie891 (talk) 14:47, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, and why was this even nominated, the subject died in 1906. The Public domain notice on it reads: "This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published (or registered with the U.S. Copyright Office) before January 1, 1927." Even if it was taken later than 1868, is it somehow credited to being later than 1927 (even though the person died in '06?). Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:39, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Also realized that the photo is of a much younger man than 67, the age Church died, so it must have been taken in the 19th century (the claim is it was taken in 1868, Church would have been 29 years old, and that actually seems to fit the age of the man in the photo well), and as the chance of it being held in a rightful copyright seems slim, and the upload page claims this photo is in public domain, there is nothing to refute either. As for commonsense reasons to keep it, it is Wikipedia's only photo of the man who wrote the most famous editorial in the history of the U.S., "Yes, Virginia, There is a Santa Claus", Christmas is coming up and that page is receiving lots of viewers. But bottom line (except the Christmas thing), nothing broken. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:52, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Very unfortunately, neither of those are reasons to keep the image. What we have to consider is whether the image actually "was published (or registered with the U.S. Copyright Office) before January 1, 1927" and in this case, it seems to be very likely that the image was held in a private album until its digitization here. Per the US definition of publication: “Publication is the distribution of copies or phonorecords of a work to the public" which doesn't seem to have happened here, sadly. Eddie891 (talk) 23:15, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Under the copyright law this would fall under public domain, as "the creator of the original expression in a work is its author. The author is also the owner of copyright unless there is a written agreement by which the author assigns the copyright to another person or entity, such as a publisher." The owner of the copyright, the photographer, is long gone, and there is no logical reason or any evidence that they passed on the copyright for this particular photograph, which seems to have been done for the benefit and use of Mr. Church, to anyone during either of their lifetimes. Randy Kryn (talk) 07:08, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Very unfortunately, neither of those are reasons to keep the image. What we have to consider is whether the image actually "was published (or registered with the U.S. Copyright Office) before January 1, 1927" and in this case, it seems to be very likely that the image was held in a private album until its digitization here. Per the US definition of publication: “Publication is the distribution of copies or phonorecords of a work to the public" which doesn't seem to have happened here, sadly. Eddie891 (talk) 23:15, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Also realized that the photo is of a much younger man than 67, the age Church died, so it must have been taken in the 19th century (the claim is it was taken in 1868, Church would have been 29 years old, and that actually seems to fit the age of the man in the photo well), and as the chance of it being held in a rightful copyright seems slim, and the upload page claims this photo is in public domain, there is nothing to refute either. As for commonsense reasons to keep it, it is Wikipedia's only photo of the man who wrote the most famous editorial in the history of the U.S., "Yes, Virginia, There is a Santa Claus", Christmas is coming up and that page is receiving lots of viewers. But bottom line (except the Christmas thing), nothing broken. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:52, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep "PD-US-unpublished" or published, either way PD, take your choice. --RAN (talk) 01:40, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) See below, the image was definitely published before 2003 but cannot be confirmed to have been published before 1927. Eddie891 (talk) 15:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Not aware of PD-US-unpublished. Happy toEddie891 (talk) 01:10, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination .- First confirmed publication was 1998. Before 2003 but after 1927, so would seem to be copyrighted. Eddie891 (talk) 15:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- Public domain according to the Cornell chart (linked): unpublished, unknown photographer, 120 years after its 1868 creation, which puts public domain in 1988. Use in 1998 comes 10 years after it had already entered public domain. See my note below. Randy Kryn (talk) 07:50, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
- First confirmed publication was 1998. Before 2003 but after 1927, so would seem to be copyrighted. Eddie891 (talk) 15:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- If this image was first published (or registered) before 1927 ({{PD-US-expired}}) or from 2003 onwards ({{PD-US-unpublished}}), great. Otherwise, neither tag applies, so how do we know that this image is PD? Brianjd (talk) 14:12, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- PD-Unpublished: "it is an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, and it was created before 1902." the maximal lifespan of a person is 120 years, so anything created prior to 1902 is PD in the USA. --RAN (talk) 17:27, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), The first criteria of PD-US-unpublished is "This work was never published prior to January 1, 2003". This work was verifiably published in 1998 which is before 2003. Eddie891 (talk) 17:37, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- In public domain per the Cornell chart: "Unpublished works when the death date of the author is not known. 120 years from date of creation." The photo is in public domain if it wasn't published before 1988, 120 years after its creation by an unknown photographer in 1868. Someone using it in 1998, ten years after 1988, doesn't remove it from public domain as it was already, according to Cornell, in public domain. Randy Kryn (talk) 07:21, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Per discussion. Work entered the public domain in 1988, 120 years after creation. --IronGargoyle (talk) 01:29, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
I didn't find it of the website of https://parcs.canada.ca/ but I doubt the image is free. Probalby have more a Crown Copyright. Fralambert (talk) 16:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- It's close to the official logo....but not exactly the same logo here .....looks like old logo incorporating to new design old logo...Moxy (talk) 18:08, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- This new logo seem used by the Facebook page of Parks Canada [4] and the You Tube Channel [5]. But not of the Officiel site. Fralambert (talk) 22:51, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. No evidence that the copyright owner placed the logo under free license or that the uploader has the right to license it. See also previous deletions of Parks Canada logo(s): Commons:Deletion requests/File:Parks Parcs Canada beaver logo.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Parks Canada Logo.svg. -- Asclepias (talk) 19:30, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Parks Canada - Parcs Canada logo 2022.png. -- Asclepias (talk) 19:30, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 01:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
Same reason as File:Parks Canada - Parcs Canada logo 2022.svg, wrong licence. It should be a Crown Copyright and it will made this image non free. Fralambert (talk) 16:03, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 01:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Medals of Czechoslovakia
[edit]Per [6], this Gregor Johann Mendel Honorary Medal for Merit in the Biological Sciences has been awarded since 1965 first by the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, then since 1995 by the Czech Academy of Sciences. It was designed by academic painter, graphic artist and medallist Lumír Šindelář (1925–2010), so it is not in the public domain yet, and the files should be deleted. They can be restored in 2081.
- File:Balthasar-Vladimir-15mendel.jpg
- File:Balthasar-Vladimir-mendelavers.jpg
- File:Balthasar-Vladimir-mendelrevers.jpg
Rosenzweig τ 11:45, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 18:40, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
No medadata, low resolution. Looks like copyvio. Author showed the same date (25 May 2020) for two photos with the church that has various conditions on two photos. Also this is a date of uploading of both photos. --Interfase (talk) 23:23, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- Absence of meta data does not mean that photo is stolen, people use to clean metadata if they want to hide any private data, and contribute anonymously. Uploader provided the date in the file name, it is stated that it is 1986 (Samvel-Մատրասա-գյուղի-Սբ.-Աստվածածին-եկեղեցին-1860-թ.-լուս.-Ս.-Կ.-ի-1986-թ.-300x222.jpg). Which resolution do you expect from 1986 from an author, who might be simply not reach enough to have a better camera in USSR in 1986? By the way if this was shot by an old-school camera and then scanned with a scanner, where you suppose to get metadata from? Forget it. The date 25 May 2020, which you refer to, is just an upload date: beginner to wiki-commons may not have enough experience to put the capture date in corresponding field, or mix up which date supposed to be entered into this field - the date of capture or date of adding it to commons. Or simple the date was prefilled during the upload by the system and was not corrected by uploader.
- I just want to mention that the user that asks to remove this file also asked to remove the whole article in Russian Wikipedia, where this file is being used. Important to know that this Armenian church depicted on the image is highly damaged now and currently located on the territory of Azerbaijan, where Armenians have no access to. Another image showing the damaged state of the church as of 2020 was nominated for removal after it was added by me into this article I am talking about in Russian Wikipedia. I've placed two pictures in the article near each other, so that one could easily compare the state of the church in 1986 and 2020, it seems like someone does not like that the people see what happened to Armenian church in modern Azerbaijan. --Headgo (talk) 01:00, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- There is no any evidence that the uploader is the author of the photo. If this photo was even scanned it should be in much higher resolution. This photo looks like copied from some social media and uploaded here. --Interfase (talk) 01:28, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- "If this photo was even scanned it should be in much higher resolution" - who told you that? You have no idea about creator, how he scanned the photo, etc. It is just a speculation.
- "This photo looks like copied from some social media and uploaded here" - You want to delete it? You have to prove it. Your arguments is no reason to delete very rare photo, taking into account that I cannot afford visiting the region and taking another photo for the article you are trying to delete together with this photo. --Headgo (talk) 13:45, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Not me, but uploader should prove that he/she is an creator/copyright holder of this photo. If it is true, uploader can reupload higher quality version of the photo. Current version looks like coyright violated. --Interfase (talk) 16:13, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- If you claim, that it is copyvio, you have to prove it and not the other way around. Ever heard about presumption of innocence? --Headgo (talk) 17:31, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- Actually not. If there are doubts about copyright volaion, uploader not others must prove that it is not copyvio. See Commons:How to detect copyright violations: Signs of probable violations:... Low-resolution pictures. Probably taken from a web site; photographers have access to better content. If photogragher is a copyright holder of the photo, in that case there will not be any problem to upload better version, if not the photo should be deleted as potential copyvio. --Interfase (talk) 07:03, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
- You quote this "Signs of probable violations:... Low-resolution pictures. Probably taken from a web site; photographers have access to better content." - this is published under the chapter "Photographs of celebrities, rock bands, etc." Church is not celebrity. Further more, why do you do such a selective quote, hiding the context and that not all pictures with low resolution is a coyvio. Here is the full quote:
Photographs of celebrities, rock bands, etc.
Not all such photos are copyright violations, but they often are, and thus they warrant special scrutiny. Signs of probable violations:
• "Staged" photographs, where the subjects obviously pose for the photographer. Almost always, such people do not pose for amateur photographers; they pose for (semi-)professionals, who usually demand payment for their works and seldom put them under free licenses.
• Low-resolution pictures. Probably taken from a web site; photographers have access to better content.
It is however possible for amateurs to take photographs of celebrities. Examples include concerts, public appearances, etc.; this often needs chance. But, generally, the people will then explain how and where they took the photograph, and will provide some high-resolution shot.- You say: "If photogragher is a copyright holder of the photo, in that case there will not be any problem to upload better version, if not the photo should be deleted as potential copyvio." - This is not written in any rule, just your own statement. I repeat, did you ever heard about presumption of innocence? Your strong will to delete is not sufficient. And yes, this _is_ a problem to upload another picture if user is not active for a long time, that he seems to be. And one more time: picture is made in 1986 in Soviet Union, by that time and in that country there were no digital cameras available for making beautiful high resolution pictures, this is a bad scan of paper printed picture, which does not automatically mean that this picture is stolen. --Headgo (talk) 17:34, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
- You forgot to highlight etc. and but they often are. Again, low resolution of the image indicates that it is probably taken from some web site or social media. If uploader is copyright holder of the photo, he/she can do better scan and upload the photo in high resolution. If you want to keep this photo, contact with an uploader and ask him/her to upload better version. What is a problem? --Interfase (talk) 22:47, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
- Church is not part of the row: celebrities, rock bands, etc. Thus it does not make any difference, whether I left "etc." or not. Most important that in your quote you skipped the context which tells that low resolution is about photographs of persons not the buildings. There is no rule saying that only high resolution photographs are allowed here. As about contacting the uploader: I believe that there is an automatic notification sent out to the uploader, but if he/she is not active any more or his/her contact details are not actual any more, he/she will not get this notification, it seems like this account is abandoned as of now. Do you have any contact information of him/her? If so, I would like to write to him, please share and stop asking "what is the problem?" since there is no problem, except that uploader is inactive, which I mentioned already above, and another bigger problem - there are people, which don't want to show up what happened to Armenian church in Azerbaijan in couple of decades. --Headgo (talk) 10:56, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- Low resolution is about photographs of everything. And uploader has a talk page where you can ask to upload better version. If user is not active it does not give a right to keep here his/her copyvio. If this is not a copyvio, user can anytime reupload better version of the photograph after its deletion. We cannot steal copyright protected photos from Internet and fill the Commons with them and become inactive to keep these photos here. It does not work like that. --Interfase (talk) 14:27, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- You have to be a bit more polite towards the uploader, especially if he is not active and cannot respond to your not proved claims that he has stolen something. I warn you to keep your style according to spirit of wikipedia. --Headgo (talk) 23:45, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
- I didn't claim that "he has stolen something". But taking something without a permission is stealing. If user is not active and will not upload better version then he will not prove that he is copyright holder and photo should be deleted as potential copyvio. --Interfase (talk) 05:02, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- You have to be a bit more polite towards the uploader, especially if he is not active and cannot respond to your not proved claims that he has stolen something. I warn you to keep your style according to spirit of wikipedia. --Headgo (talk) 23:45, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
- Low resolution is about photographs of everything. And uploader has a talk page where you can ask to upload better version. If user is not active it does not give a right to keep here his/her copyvio. If this is not a copyvio, user can anytime reupload better version of the photograph after its deletion. We cannot steal copyright protected photos from Internet and fill the Commons with them and become inactive to keep these photos here. It does not work like that. --Interfase (talk) 14:27, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- Church is not part of the row: celebrities, rock bands, etc. Thus it does not make any difference, whether I left "etc." or not. Most important that in your quote you skipped the context which tells that low resolution is about photographs of persons not the buildings. There is no rule saying that only high resolution photographs are allowed here. As about contacting the uploader: I believe that there is an automatic notification sent out to the uploader, but if he/she is not active any more or his/her contact details are not actual any more, he/she will not get this notification, it seems like this account is abandoned as of now. Do you have any contact information of him/her? If so, I would like to write to him, please share and stop asking "what is the problem?" since there is no problem, except that uploader is inactive, which I mentioned already above, and another bigger problem - there are people, which don't want to show up what happened to Armenian church in Azerbaijan in couple of decades. --Headgo (talk) 10:56, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
- You forgot to highlight etc. and but they often are. Again, low resolution of the image indicates that it is probably taken from some web site or social media. If uploader is copyright holder of the photo, he/she can do better scan and upload the photo in high resolution. If you want to keep this photo, contact with an uploader and ask him/her to upload better version. What is a problem? --Interfase (talk) 22:47, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
- Actually not. If there are doubts about copyright volaion, uploader not others must prove that it is not copyvio. See Commons:How to detect copyright violations: Signs of probable violations:... Low-resolution pictures. Probably taken from a web site; photographers have access to better content. If photogragher is a copyright holder of the photo, in that case there will not be any problem to upload better version, if not the photo should be deleted as potential copyvio. --Interfase (talk) 07:03, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
- If you claim, that it is copyvio, you have to prove it and not the other way around. Ever heard about presumption of innocence? --Headgo (talk) 17:31, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- Not me, but uploader should prove that he/she is an creator/copyright holder of this photo. If it is true, uploader can reupload higher quality version of the photo. Current version looks like coyright violated. --Interfase (talk) 16:13, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- There is no any evidence that the uploader is the author of the photo. If this photo was even scanned it should be in much higher resolution. This photo looks like copied from some social media and uploaded here. --Interfase (talk) 01:28, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- delete per nom Solavirum (talk) 06:23, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
Keep - no valid reason shown for deletion, speculating doesn't help either. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 18:30, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 01:07, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
Derivative work of this image (Warning: Image of an obese man's anus) of Nikocado Avocado's anus. --benlisquareTalk•Contribs 07:50, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- It’s not a derivative work if just its color palette resembles the original photo, or is it? Even though it needed the original photo to exist, it’s in fact completely different from it, and only someone with well-trained eyes would be able to tell it. @DarwIn: can you check this one, as you’re certainly a more experienced user than me? RodRabelo7 (talk) 07:58, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- This image could not have been generated without the original image, as it uses the img2img feature within Stable Diffusion, with the denoiser value set to somewhere between 0.4 and 0.7 for it to maintain the same frame composition and general shape, but with the contents replaced with pumpkins instead of Nikocado Avocado. I'll leave it to the rest of the Commons community to decide whether or not the threshold of originality has been met; I personally don't have a firm opinion on this at the moment. --benlisquareTalk•Contribs 08:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks for opening the talk then. RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:04, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- No hard feelings, by the way, I didn't nominate this deletion request specifically out of spite as a result of the image content, I hope you'll understand. I myself am curious as to how the Wikimedia Commons community in general will decide on this, as it would set a precedent as to whether Commons will consider img2img AI-generated COM:DW images as meeting the threshold of originality or not; the implications of this discussion will determine what future content can be uploaded to Commons. --benlisquareTalk•Contribs 08:11, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Alright, thanks for opening the talk then. RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:04, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- This image could not have been generated without the original image, as it uses the img2img feature within Stable Diffusion, with the denoiser value set to somewhere between 0.4 and 0.7 for it to maintain the same frame composition and general shape, but with the contents replaced with pumpkins instead of Nikocado Avocado. I'll leave it to the rest of the Commons community to decide whether or not the threshold of originality has been met; I personally don't have a firm opinion on this at the moment. --benlisquareTalk•Contribs 08:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep may be eventually inspired (seeded) on the other image, but IMO certainly does not count as a Derivative Work. Darwin Ahoy! 19:20, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete not a copyright violation but out of scope. We don’t need an AI generated picture of pumpkins that look suspiciously like someone’s anus. Dronebogus (talk) 04:36, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- It only looks like that if you’ve already seen the anus picture. RodRabelo7 (talk) 20:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- No it doesn’t, it was my first thought. Dronebogus (talk) 00:54, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- It only looks like that if you’ve already seen the anus picture. RodRabelo7 (talk) 20:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per Dronebogus... Madeline (part of me) 13:36, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per Dronebogus. Not a copyright violation, but out of scope. Nosferattus (talk) 11:08, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Delete No idea what the purpose of having this image here is--Trade (talk) 17:17, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of scope. --IronGargoyle (talk) 21:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Promotional image, lack of educational value. Nanahuatl (talk) 08:02, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Doesn't seem useless. Shows a basin, two stools, a dresser, etc. Doesn't seem very effectively promotional, if indeed it is. What's the name of the hotel? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:20, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Not really promotional. Emptywords (talk) 10:54, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. No requirement to delete; no consensus to do so. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 04:12, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
File:Le torpillage du "Falaba" Acte de féroce piraterie commis par un sous-marin allemand le 28 Mars 1915 dans le Canal St-Georges - - Sandy-Hook 15. LCCN2016651582.jpg
[edit]
Seems to be by French artist Georges Taboreau (died 1960); PD in the US but will not be PD in France until 2031. Looks like this was published in Paris. Could be moved to en-wiki, or undeleted in 2031. Carl Lindberg (talk) 08:45, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: We have at least one other work by this artist: File:Messageries Maritimes, Japon-cutout.png. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:54, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Not yet PD in artist's country of origin; no indication copyright laws of other country would superceed. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 04:15, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
{{PD-Poland}} only applies to photographs. Source page states the material is copyrighted ("Podlega ochronie autorsko-prawnej"). Botev (talk) 08:49, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- True, true. I've confused drawing with a photo at this item. Emptywords (talk) 09:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; uploader concurs with deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 04:16, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
tento obrázek byl nahrazený samostatnými fotkami publikací: Balthasar-Vladimir-veneziana.jpg a Balthasar-Vladimir-bethoven.jpg Iva Drbalová (talk) 19:39, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
Kept: If anything this is a better copy. --Gbawden (talk) 06:42, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
obrázek byl nahrazený za Balthasar-Vladimir-veneziana.jpg Iva Drbalová (talk) 15:08, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. No convincing arguments for why both files should not be kept. IronGargoyle (talk) 23:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per above & previous. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 04:16, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
This logo does not belong to the Venezuelan political party Voluntad Popular, it is a manipulated image since there is no official record of the political party using the symbol of socialism in its logo. Please remove it as it may be misleading to the user Jguzguz12 (talk) 15:59, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, but for a separate reason. As per File:Threshold of originality world map.svg, the TOO of Venezuela is unknown, so we have to assume the image is not ok.
Deleted: per above, unused, OOS. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 04:17, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Unclear origin Siradan (talk) 20:51, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Source fixed, the file has value as the symbol of occupation administration --VileGecko (talk) 16:00, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: problems seem to have been resolved. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 04:18, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Lawrence Ferlinghetti 2012 06.jpg WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:40, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Not quite a duplicate. The color saturation or something seems different. Also, this is the one which is in use. IronGargoyle (talk) 04:32, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per IronGargoyle. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 04:19, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Logo appears to be above the threshold of originality. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 19:51, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Did you read the licensing notice? It was released into the public domain by Shiv Sena Office, Andheri. Therefore, COM:TOO is moot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:50, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- This logo is released by our office headquarters at Andheri, Maharashtra
- In accordance to Government of India (Right to Information Act)
- There is no point to delete it.
- Please stop this deletation nomination page or else I will complain to higher admin that you are bullying small Wikimedians and also deleting PD files Shiv Sena Office, Andheri (talk) 06:11, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Krd. --Rosenzweig τ 12:43, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
orphan talk page, may be deleted after some time, so other users may read my comment about deletion of the file. Ellywa (talk) 21:11, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Question Talk pages aren't normally retained, regardless of what happens to the file? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:39, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- True. But in this case I wanted the commenting users to give the opportunity to read my comment on this issue. Can be deleted in a few days imho. Ellywa (talk) 22:36, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- If talk pages are normally retained, why should we delete this one? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:47, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek No, talk pages are normally deleted together with the main page/file they are attached to. But when I see a situation like this, I think that seems like a silly rule. Brianjd (talk) 14:28, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- If talk pages are normally retained, why should we delete this one? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:47, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
The talk page consists of the heading Are we sure this is the Dutch goalkeeper born in 1994?
followed by:
i'm really not convinced. Andries Noppert doesn't look like that, it could be his father or an other family member, but it definitely isn't Andries from 1994. DaanTW (talk) 09:47, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm also sure this isn't the Frisian goalkeeper of the Netherlands. This picture looks like a picture taken in the 1980's, The goalkeeper Andries Noppert is born in 1994. FreyaSport (talk) 10:42, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- @DutchDevil: Recently you added this photo to ptwp and nlwp. How certain are you that Mr. Handsome here is the 1994 Andries Noppert? He does not look like him. Strepulah (talk) 18:52, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Brianjd (talk) 14:33, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- Perhaps I should add I uploaded the image on 00:17, 3 December 2022, supposing the copyright was in order. But it was a fake, luckily quickly discovered by soccer enthousiasts. Ellywa (talk) 17:16, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- OK, Commons policy on talk pages is the opposite of Wikivoyage policy. Talk pages on Wikivoyage are deleted when they are spam or vandalism, but not when an article or redirect being discussed has been deleted for a different reason. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:10, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Krd. --Rosenzweig τ 12:43, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Files of Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse
[edit]- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 02.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 03.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 04.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 05.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 06.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 08.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 09.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 11.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 12.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 14.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 15.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 17.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 18.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 20.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 21.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 23.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 24.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 25.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 27.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 28.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 30.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 33.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 34.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 35.jpg
- File:Mercedes AMG GTS at Zurich Friesstrasse (Ank Kumar, Infosys Limited) 36.jpg
_02.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_03.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_04.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_05.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_06.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_08.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_09.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_11.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_12.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_14.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_15.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_17.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_18.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_20.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_21.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_23.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_24.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_25.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_27.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_28.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_30.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_33.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_34.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_35.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_36.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Reasons for deletion request: Help! Why upload 36(!) photos of the same car? All photos are double and triple. There remain still 6 different pictures of this series after deletion. --Jnmths (talk) 21:49, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- The number of images isn't an issue, but if they are the same, it is.
- It's hard to judge from your deletion request (it doesn't even load correctly). Looking at Category:Mercedes-AMG C190 GT S there are more than 6 different views of the car, plus some vary by exposure. To me, it's desirable to photograph an object from multiple perspectives. Enhancing999 (talk) 13:39, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, you are right there are more than six views. I thought one photo from each corner, one of the side and one of the front is enough. I now reduced the list of the deletion request. After deletion there are now 11 photos left. Now there are really only duplicates in the list. Jnmths (talk) 20:02, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 04:18, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Эта фотография не может быть собственной работой 2007 года, поскольку Софья Радзиевская умерла 16 июля 1989 года. https://history-kazan.ru/2017-yubilei/17012-sofya-radzievskaya-zhila-i-tvorila-v-kazani Jim Hokins (talk) 15:00, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 13:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
По запросу владельца Ivanov.A.S.1993 (talk) 16:21, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. File is in use and was uploaded far longer than 7 days ago. IronGargoyle (talk) 13:46, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per IG. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
No use for this template. AFP files are rarely uploaded and this cannot be used as a license. HeminKurdistan (talk) 21:31, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
low quality duplicate of existing image Poliocretes (talk) 19:04, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Question. What is the existing image this duplicates? IronGargoyle (talk) 04:35, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
- this one: [7] Poliocretes (talk) 12:45, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
![[7]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:J._Rai%C5%86a_Daugavpils_6._pamatskola.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination, duplicate of File:J. Raiņa Daugavpils 6. pamatskola.jpg. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:55, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
obrázek byl nahrazený za Balthasar-Vladimír-Fauna.jpg Iva Drbalová (talk) 15:07, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Not a duplicate. The pages are arranged in a significantly different way, which may not be considered an improvement by all editors. IronGargoyle (talk) 13:51, 11 February 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per User:IronGargoyle. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:29, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Definitely not "own work". This is available on the net in many places, such as here. They credit the U.S. Maritime Administration though, so maybe they are PD-USGov. There is a page with lower-resolution versions of these renderings at www.maritime.dot.gov, without mention of third-party authorship. However, they do appear to have contracted with a Danish firm to produce the renderings, so this may be their author ship -- see www.dd3d-studio.com. Hard to say if the contract specified public domain status or not. Carl Lindberg (talk) 18:01, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and COM:PRP. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:30, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Image still under copyright in USA due to COM:URAA A1Cafel (talk) 03:34, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:03, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Unclear origin Siradan (talk) 20:51, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- Keep «Геральдика.ру» https://geraldika.ru/s/7998 Куку Кукуевичъ (talk) 15:33, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Kept: the source is showing a CCBYSA licensing. Therefore decided to keep this file. --Ellywa (talk) 20:43, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
