Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2023/01/14
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){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}
.gif){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
_-_2021.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Images out of COM:SCOPE. Pictures of people should include all their face, not just foreheads. No indication of user's own work, three photos, three styles, one camera, otherwise no metadata.
Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:49, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:02, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Images without EXIF data, unlikely to be own works. May also be out of scope.
- File:Female Forehead.jpg
- File:Kristan.jpg
- File:BrittanyC.jpg
- File:AmandaV.jpg
- File:Alison B.jpg
- File:TerraY2.jpg
- File:Adrianna.jpg
- File:TerraY.jpg
Yann (talk) 16:01, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Hystrix (talk) 15:44, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Very unlikely to be own works. See also uploads by sock Yoshi3620.
- File:Female Eyes 17.jpg
- File:Female Eyes 16.jpg
- File:Female Eyes 15.jpg
- File:Female Eyes 14.jpg
- File:Female Eyes 13.jpg
- File:Female Eyes 12.jpg
- File:Female Eyes 11.jpg
- File:Female Eyes 10.jpg
- File:Female Eyes 9.jpg
- File:Female Eyes 8.jpg
- File:Female Eyes 7.jpg
- File:Female Eyes 6.jpg
- File:Female Eyes 5.jpg
- File:Female Eyes 4.jpg
- File:Female Eyes2.jpg
- File:Female Eyes3.jpg
- File:Female Eyes4.jpg
- File:Female Eyes5.jpg
- File:Female Eyes6.jpg
- File:Female Eyes7.jpg
- File:Female Eyes.jpg
Yann (talk) 09:49, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Actually already warned before, so account blocked. Also socking. --Yann (talk) 09:51, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Definitely Anogenyogan67 (talk) 10:54, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Screenshot, uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 10:57, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation Heavy Water (talk) 19:31, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 19:52, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Obvious professional photoshoot. Pictures without camera details tend to be suspect. We require a very much better declaration of source and/or permissions. See COM:VRT. Potential copyright violation. COM:PCP applies. 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 11:37, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:13, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
The uploading editor has disclosed on their en.wiki Talk page ([1]) that this is a screengrab from a television broadcast, which is not compatible with Commons' licensing. 2601:240:8200:BFE0:C8CB:63A4:D2F5:94C1 18:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 09:49, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Privacy Concern Mohandagar97 (talk) 22:34, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Please Delete this photo because Privacy Concern Mohandagar97 (talk) 22:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request & no permission. --Achim55 (talk) 12:51, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
I changed my mind, I don't want it to be publicly visible anymore Ayshorjo (talk) 18:36, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:29, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
File:Painting of the Golden Temple in Amritsar with Gurdwara Baba Atal in the background on the left.jpg
[edit]
please delete this file i uploaded as it is an accidental duplicate of a file i uploaded previously: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Golden_Temple_from_%22Original_sketches_in_the_Punjaub_by_a_Lady%22.jpg ThethPunjabi (talk) 22:47, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 17:50, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Copyviol from https://www.chiesabellunofeltre.it/vescovo/ . Antonio1952 (talk) 22:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Keep- @Andy Dingley: Right click > Open image in new tab > Resolution is 1200x1800px. Gyrostat (talk) 13:33, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, right https://www.chiesabellunofeltre.it/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/12/18/immagine-ufficiale-2-1.jpg (after a lot of fiddling) is big enough. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:41, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Andy Dingley: Right click > Open image in new tab > Resolution is 1200x1800px. Gyrostat (talk) 13:33, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 21:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
I don't like it Ahmed Azzam Nafiz (talk) 08:43, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Keep @Ahmed Azzam Nafiz: What does it matter if you don't like the photo. PawełMM (talk) 09:36, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Not a valid reason. Tryvix1509 (talk) 05:40, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: G7 and potentially out of scope if not a copyvio. --Gbawden (talk) 05:36, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Unlicensed and unfree logo Osama Eid (talk) 11:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- هذه الرابطة تقدم خدمات مجانية ولا تتقاضى أي رسوم من أي فرد من الأفراد ن وهذه ليست دعاية لها لأنها مؤسسة مجتمع مدني وليست ربحية والتسجيل بها لا يعني أي شيء Dr.mohammed.aburahma (talk) 13:14, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- ما هو الأساس القانوني الذي بنيت عليه مزاعمك بان الصفحة شعارها عليه حقوق وأنت تتحدث مع صاحب هذا الشعار Dr.mohammed.aburahma (talk) 13:25, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by علاء. --Rosenzweig τ 07:42, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
File:This dingus let's out a final shreak before being consumed by the infrared heater. Circa 1962.jpg
[edit]
Invalid licence Tpguy825 (talk) 11:33, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by GreenMeansGo. --Rosenzweig τ 07:41, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Nie spełnia wymogów prawa USA w Polsce i polskiej Wikipedii.!! . Pamulab (talk) 11:49, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
This deletion request is a mistake. It is my own photo and I don't want it to be deleted Pamulab (talk) 08:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 13:18, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
almost certain copy right vio. not properly attributor. uploader notes himself as "author" but provides link to an online newspaper. Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license probably invalid. Merbabu (talk) 08:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Túrelio. --Rosenzweig τ 10:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Hej! För snart två år sedan laddade jag upp en skärmdump från Netflix-filmen "Cam" på Wikimedia Commons. Jag gjorde det eftersom jag hade skapat en Wikipedia-artikel på svenskspråkiga Wikipedia om just filmen "Cam". Det som jag inte tänkte på i efterhand var att upphovsmännen som äger skärmdumpen har skyddad licens enligt upphovsrättslagen. Jag äger inte bilden och vill verkligen be om ursäkt för att jag klantade till mig och publicerade skärmdumpen på Wikimedia Commons. Jag har gjort en del researches på internet om upphovsrättsintrång och vad som händer ifall man begår denna typ av brott. Jag är beredd att motta er hårda kritik och vad det här brottet kan få för framtida konsekvenser. I fortsättningen lovar jag på heder och samvete att inte ladda upp bilder eller filmer som jag inte äger. Copyvio: https://occ-0-768-116.1.nflxso.net/dnm/api/v6/E8vDc_W8CLv7-yMQu8KMEC7Rrr8/AAAABe_ycedgvQnlM2zUb4pxnKMIVSAr0ramAKxiQ_z_d7pajkv8QBCl7lUukJten66Qcw-CrXhyQ0BQvZiXKtLsS7oeV8y4zDcqyvaQ.jpg?r=bd3 Jonathan Stribrant (talk) 23:07, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Jon Kolbert. --Rosenzweig τ 10:01, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by %USER% as no permission Dltl2010 (talk) 04:12, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
- This file (photo) was taken by me.
- This must have no copyright/permission problem.
- In fact, all photos I uploaded were taken by myself.
Dltl2010 (talk) 04:18, 19 November 2021 (UTC)- I am confused too. How can an "Own work" require evidence of permission? Brianjd (talk) 11:03, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion - If one wishes to renominate this file with another policy-based rationale, they are able to do so. I will defer to other administrators to review it. Happy holidays. --Missvain (talk) 23:22, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
It's really invaluable non-human nature, I don't want it to be publicly visible anymore. --14.0.174.86 08:56, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Anyone want to delete this file please go to hell asap !!!!! Dltl2010 (talk) 02:08, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Strakhov (talk) 10:35, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Andre Carrotflower as Speedy (Selfie) Kadı Message 07:59, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- This file was previously deleted as COM:CSD#F10(!), despite being uploaded by a user that had been active here for five years (and much longer on other projects). It was undeleted after I questioned this.
- At Commons talk:Project scope#Are unused personal images by substantial contributors allowed?, there seems to be a consensus for allowing active users to upload personal images (even if unused and otherwise out of scope). Brianjd (talk) 09:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Brianjd, is it the user’s personal photo or someone else? @Trade, could you provide more information about the file? Kadı Message 11:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- It's a picture found on FlickR, like so many others. Not a photo of me.
- As far as i am aware we did not had any photos for mint green hair specifically hence i thought it was relevant. And i also thought the description of the image made it interesting enough to include it here Trade (talk) 15:49, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Kadı I also found the description interesting. Brianjd (talk) 01:37, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Brianjd, is it the user’s personal photo or someone else? @Trade, could you provide more information about the file? Kadı Message 11:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Keep because it is interesting. show me other mint hair images ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 01:03, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: in use, in scope. --Strakhov (talk) 10:40, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
obvs not own work Streamline8988 (talk) 08:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: unlikely to be own work, COM:VRT needed. --Strakhov (talk) 10:40, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Raw text, out of scope. Commons is not for articles. Achim55 (talk) 16:04, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope text. --Strakhov (talk) 10:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
The person is no longer okay that the picture is online and want that I delete the picture. ~ BeastLP BeastLP (talk) 19:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Delete by courtesy. Uploader's request, uploaded 6 weeks ago, not in use. --Achim55 (talk) 19:50, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: probably out of scope, copyright issues (not own work). --Strakhov (talk) 10:45, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sannenslands (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope: Maps and symbols of a fictional nation
Enyavar (talk) 05:23, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:23, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sannenslands (talk · contribs)
[edit]out of scope: fiction
- File:SannenslandCoatArms.png
- File:SannenslandCountryBalls.jpg
- File:CountrySannenslandMaps.jpg
- File:CountrySannensland.png
Enyavar (talk) 08:00, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 07:14, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sannenslands (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope: third fictional nation made up by the same user
Enyavar (talk) 12:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Kadı Message 11:15, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Main portal of Rosary Basilica
[edit]Per COM:FOP France: non-free mosaics by Marko Ivan Rupnik.
- File:Detail of the mosaic illustration "The Wedding of Cana" on the entrance to the Basilica of Our Lady of the Rosary of Lourdes, by Ivan Rupnik, from the side.jpg
- File:Detail of the mosaic illustration "The Wedding of Cana" on the entrance to the Basilica of Our Lady of the Rosary of Lourdes, by Ivan Rupnik.jpg
- File:Lourdes - 2014-09-14 - img 2855.jpg
- File:Lourdes - 2014-09-14 - img 2857.jpg
- File:Lourdes France fronton fc06.jpg
- File:Lourdes France fronton fc2.jpg
- File:Lourdes France fronton fc4.jpg
- File:Lourdes IMG 9239.JPG
- File:Lourdes IMG 9241.JPG
- File:Lourdes IMG 9242.JPG
- File:Lourdes IMG 9243.JPG
- File:Lourdes IMG 9244.JPG
- File:Lourdes église Rosaire.JPG
- File:Main portal - Basilica of the Immaculate Conception - Lourdes 2014.JPG
- File:Sanctuaire de Lourdes 34.jpg
- File:The entrance to the Basilica of Our Lady of the Rosary of Lourdes.jpg
- File:The mosaic illustrations above the left entrance to the Basilica of Our Lady of the Rosary of Lourdes.jpg
TadejM (t/p) 12:53, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 11:31, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
used for self promo on enwp --Minorax«¦talk¦» 15:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 10:47, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Personal photo for non-Wikipedian: OoS --Alaa :)..! 15:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 10:47, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
and:
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-43 (50665496682).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-42 (50665420841).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-45 (50665494762).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-46 (50664670958).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-47 (50664670213).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-48 (50665415631).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-49 (50664668638).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-51 (50665413186).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-56 (50664661343).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-57 (50665405661).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-59 (50664658788).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-60 (50664657733).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-61 (50665479697).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-63 (50664654463).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-68 (50664650263).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-74 (50664645673).jpg
- File:202011- thanksgiving 2020-8 (50664708438).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:00, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 11:31, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:07, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 10:47, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:09, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 10:47, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused chart of questionable notability. Should be in tabular data, MediaWiki graph or SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:10, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 10:47, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:12, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 10:47, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Used in draft that only contribution of this user. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 10:47, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 10:47, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Uploader request. Photo is probably a copyright violation, as its inclusion of other copyrighted works seems to surpass de minimis. IagoQnsi (talk) 20:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 10:47, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
ordinary person Mateus2019 (talk) 19:13, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Personal photo by non-contributors (F10). --Alaa :)..! 13:39, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Well above the threshold of originality even in the U.S. due to the 3D effects. Although the uploader's username suggests they are the copyright holder, this is generally not accepted as evidence of permission because anyone can use any username. Ixfd64 (talk) 00:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination, note that this is Australian ABC so the threshold of originality is even lower. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:29, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
possible copyvio (photographer Klaus Mellenthin) M2k~dewiki (talk) 00:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:30, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
blatant advertising Veracious (talk) 02:27, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
blatant advertising Veracious (talk) 02:27, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
blatant advertising Veracious (talk) 02:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
blatant advertising Veracious (talk) 02:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:38, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Linked in 191.126.40.223 02:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:38, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
blatant advertising Veracious (talk) 02:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:38, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
blatant advertising Veracious (talk) 02:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:39, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
blatant investment advertising Veracious (talk) 04:40, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:40, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
blatant advertising Veracious (talk) 04:42, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:40, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Functionally a lower quality duplicate of File:Joe Biden at the Mexico border 2023-01-08.jpg Adeletron 3030 (talk) 04:47, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, scaled down duplicate. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:45, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Duplicate of File:Emirates Stadium (Aerial).jpg Dotx3 (talk) 05:23, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination, not a useful crop being only one pixel narrower and not in use. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Copyrighted work Xfansd (talk) 05:34, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, no evidence of permission. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:46, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Museumsart (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos. Duplicates. Should be in SVG if useful.
- File:LOGO-4000-P.png
- File:LOGO-2000-P.png
- File:LOGO-500-P.png
- File:LOGO-4000.png
- File:LOGO-1000P.png
- File:LOGO-500P.png
- File:Museum azf.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 06:13, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete copyright is also questionable as logos are protected. HeminKurdistan (talk) 13:55, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: likely unfree logos. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:47, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope Lotje (talk) 06:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:48, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
unfree artwork, commercial content (see watermark) Mateus2019 (talk) 06:59, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:49, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Misleading Moderat99b (talk) 21:03, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
Comment For file renaming use {{Move}}. A09090091 (talk) 13:57, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no reason for deletion. --Krd 13:24, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Low quality COM:PENIS photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 07:49, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:49, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Per COM:PACKAGE A1Cafel (talk) 07:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:50, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in Iran A1Cafel (talk) 08:38, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:57, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Iran A1Cafel (talk) 08:38, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
File:Pussy grabs back - anti-Trump protesters outside the British parliament. (32653062980).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 09:07, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 09:07, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 09:07, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:58, 21 January 2023 (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 the United States A1Cafel (talk) 09:07, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for 3D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 09:09, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 09:10, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for 3D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 09:11, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.gif&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.gif&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Likely above the threshold of originality and it's OOS anyway. Adamant1 (talk) 12:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.gif){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 16:00, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
.gif){kind=link}
Totally pointless, out of scope "logo" and it also says the source is Google.com, which isn't good. Adamant1 (talk) 12:04, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 16:00, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: The name of the author in watermark is not the same as the uploader CoffeeEngineer (talk) 12:27, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 16:01, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Someone who is not a Wikipedian Osama Eid (talk) 12:36, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 16:01, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Looks like a screenshot + low resolution = dubious ownership claim Gyrostat (talk) 12:43, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 16:15, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:34, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by User:Krd. --IronGargoyle (talk) 16:56, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Abhay sen writer (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:12, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 16:57, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE as "nothing educational other than raw text". Belbury (talk) 16:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 16:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Someone who is not a Wikipedian Osama Eid (talk) 16:29, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 16:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Unlicensed and unfree logo Osama Eid (talk) 16:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, also out of project scope. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:00, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
per com:nude ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 17:02, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Unlikely to be own work, too low in pixels. Picture has no educational value. Why, I better don't share that meaning :-) - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 17:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Why would it not be own work? Trade (talk) 13:05, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
- because low res and no metadata ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 20:10, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
- Why would it not be own work? Trade (talk) 13:05, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Poor quality, not much educational value. --A1Cafel (talk) 04:14, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:02, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
The image was published without consent of the person in it. The person has asked for the image's deletion. Bruksvuks (talk) 17:36, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete by courtesy. Uploader's request, uploaded 3 weeks ago, not in use. --Achim55 (talk) 18:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:02, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
per notability policy Jan Myšák (talk) 18:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of project scope. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:03, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Photo is attributed to Dawid Linkowski in EXIF data. A depicted person is from Gdańsk while I found Dawid Linkowski – a professional PR photographer from Polish tricity. Therefore VRT permission from Dawid Linkowski would be needed to keep that file on Commons. Other file from the same uploader has been copied from Facebook. ~Cybularny Speak? 19:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:14, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama. Building is likely designed by architect who hasn't been dead for more than 50 years. Files were uploaded by what I suspect as a COM:SOCK/DUCK of Judgefloro (talk · contribs) evading blocks; see [2].
- File:Pambayang Dalubhasaan ng Marilao 02.jpg
- File:Pambayang Dalubhasaan ng Marilao 03.jpg
- File:Pambayang Dalubhasaan ng Marilao 04.jpg
- File:Pambayang Dalubhasaan ng Marilao 05.jpg
- File:Pambayang Dalubhasaan ng Marilao 06.jpg
- File:Pambayang Dalubhasaan ng Marilao 07.jpg
- File:Pambayang Dalubhasaan ng Marilao 08.jpg
- File:Pambayang Dalubhasaan ng Marilao 09.jpg
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 19:26, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:13, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Mascots of copyrighted characters, and the mascots have faithful designs. Violation of the cartoon creator/producer's copyrights as well as other intellectual property rights.
- File:2451The SpongeBob SquarePants Mascots.jpg
- File:245The SpongeBob SquarePants Mascots.jpg
- File:24The SpongeBob SquarePants Mascots.jpg
- File:The SpongeBob SquarePants Mascots.jpg
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 19:55, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, even if one were to make the argument for allowing costumes, the backdrop is also copyrighted and takes up the entire frame. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:12, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Sculptor - Роман Кикта. No Permission. Микола Василечко (talk) 20:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:09, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
PD-Iran does not apply to an image dated 19 February 2009. The person depicted lives in Canada since 1991 (per Wikipedia biography) and it seems that Iranian law is not relevant at all. HeminKurdistan (talk) 20:50, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:10, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Copyviol from https://www.chiesabellunofeltre.it/vescovo/ . Antonio1952 (talk) 20:51, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:10, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
"Uploaded a work by Marlana Thompson" with no reason for public domain status. Appears to have come from the subject's website WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 21:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, no evidence of permission. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:08, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Unidentified person and band, No encyclopedic use CoffeeEngineer (talk) 23:18, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:06, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Profile picture of an artist on his YouTube chanel https://www.youtube.com/c/Dacapri CoffeeEngineer (talk) 23:25, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:07, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Logo, Website banner, Possible ad CoffeeEngineer (talk) 23:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:06, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Logo of an artist https://linktree.com/donpartyes CoffeeEngineer (talk) 23:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:05, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Usage of stock picture https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/music-salon-background-logo-icon-template-2175987217?irclickid=Wb9VjkRhoxyNTda1acTd%3AUSLUkAwtW2Nnzyo2E0&irgwc=1&pl=77643-108110&utm_campaign=TinEye&utm_medium=Affiliate&utm_source=77643&utm_term= CoffeeEngineer (talk) 23:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:05, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
I question the educational purpose of this image. I highly doubt we will need to illustrate a person fixing a car while their pants drop enough to show off their buttocks. Ricky81682 (talk) 23:44, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:05, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Image from social networks, No encyclopedic use CoffeeEngineer (talk) 23:50, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 17:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Low-quality chemical structure; opaque (white) background & colored atom labels. We have File:Ethyl-propionate-2D-structure.svg and File:Ethyl-propionate-2D-skeletal.svg as high-quality replacements. — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 14:43, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 22:29, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
possible copyvio/not his own work, no metadata ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 18:11, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: Seems like a screenshot from a video. --Kadı Message 12:18, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
cant understand this is free licensed or not ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 18:39, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: Source is copyrighted (Copyright © 2023 Yenikent Belediyesi). --Kadı Message 12:19, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Logo CoffeeEngineer (talk) 23:31, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Kadı Message 12:20, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
out of project scope no author no source and torture image Hoyanova (talk) 16:53, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Krd. --Rosenzweig τ 14:35, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
The source doesn't report that the image is in PD nor published under free license. Works are copyrighted by default, therefore the image should be considered copyrighted. 151.62.182.89 22:12, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Fitindia. --Rosenzweig τ 09:08, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Since when have non-commercial only images been permitted on Commons? Images must be free for all to use and to modify. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:17, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Keep It isn't. This is multi-licensed (CC-nc added later) and has always been available under GFDL, which is an acceptable free licence. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:25, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- So the CC-nc is WP:BOLLOCKS? If the file is free, it must be 100% free. Can we remove the NC? Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:29, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Please learn about Multi-license. emk (talk) 17:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- OK, Keep it is, let's forget it. But, emk, with respect, that does not explain ADDING an NC license at some later date, as rights can't be taken away. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:43, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Adding an additional licence with more restrictions isn't the same as restricting an existing licence. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:54, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Adding a license makes the work less restrictive because you can choose one license and ignore others. No rights are taken away. In this case, when you choose GFDL, you can ignore non-commercial restriction from CC BY-NC. emk (talk) 05:31, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- OK,
Kept: NC licenses are acceptable in conjunction with at least one free license (which the GFDL was at the time of upload). --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:12, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10207455460457103&set=t.1605762762&type=3 credits this photoshoot to Eden Halamish. Belbury (talk) 07:52, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:25, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Celebrity advocate. 191.126.40.223 02:29, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Personal file of a non-contributor. Marbletan (talk) 19:58, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:33, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Own work 191.126.40.223 02:31, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Could you elaborate a little bit more on that? "own work" by itself is not usually a reason to delete a file. In fact, the very contrary. Strakhov (talk) 10:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: published here prior to upload to Commons. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:01, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
same https://web.archive.org/web/20161106145833/http://www.kura-corpo.co.jp/kura_tennengyo/concept.html eien20 (talk) 05:44, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, previously published, needs COM:VRT. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:06, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
copyvio, unfree screenshot from music promotional video without this license https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KeqoEB2cGI&ab_channel=RaniaCMusic Mateus2019 (talk) 06:57, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:06, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Aus einem Buch abgekupfert, also wohl URV. Jbergner (talk) 07:44, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
that traffic sign The Malaysian authorities want to remove it from the Wikipedia system. Mongolia44 08:13, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. Is there some evidence of this? And more importantly, is there a legal rationale? This is pretty clearly below the threshold of originality in COM:TOO Malaysia. IronGargoyle (talk) 15:54, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:12, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Copyviol (source: https://www.alexandra-connor.co.uk/ ) Holapaco77 (talk) 08:13, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:13, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Hoyanova (talk) 08:24, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
no source or author given no metadata present Hoyanova (talk) 08:26, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and unused personal photo. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:13, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
seems not to be useful, since it is part of the music nomenclature anywhere in the world Mateus2019 (talk) 11:49, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Agree with your deletion. It is the inverted treble clef. At some point I used it on my page; but now, I think it is useless. Regards, Nemo (talk) 15:11, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:15, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Likely above the threshold of originality and I doubt the uploader is the creator since it comes from Facebook. So unless the uploader can provide evidence to the contrary it should be deleted as copyvio. Adamant1 (talk) 12:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Keep User page image, made by the user, for that user. There will be a copyright here, but they're at liberty to license their own copyright however they wish. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:25, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Hhhhmm, I didn't notice it was being used on their user page. My bad. If someone wants to procedurally close this be my guest. Unfortunately I don't know how to do it or I probably would :( --Adamant1 (talk) 12:54, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: personal logo, only used on userpage of non-contributing user. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:17, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
out of scope. self-promotion. Bodhisattwa (talk) 13:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:17, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
This file has copyright notice and watermark, but lack of metadata and low size/resolution makes own work claim questionable HeminKurdistan (talk) 14:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, screenshot. Needs COM:VRT. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:19, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
useless, no name stated, weird descr. and file name Mateus2019 (talk) 15:04, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Appears to be a personal file of a non-contributor (COM:CSD#F10). Marbletan (talk) 18:47, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:20, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Although the source paper is released under a CC-BY licence, this image includes a Google Map, which cannot be licenced in this way. I've cropped the other two photos here into separate files so that they can be kept. Belbury (talk) 15:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Couldn't the map in this file just be replaced? FunkMonk (talk) 16:05, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- I guess, if anybody wants to do that, but this particular collage here isn't in use anywhere, and the most useful aspects - the two photos - have been kept as crops. Belbury (talk) 16:17, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Oh this is rather unfortunate, I wasn't informed that maps are not license-allowed. If both files are already cropped and separated, I guess this one is no longer necessary. PaleoNeolitic (talk) 19:43, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- I guess, if anybody wants to do that, but this particular collage here isn't in use anywhere, and the most useful aspects - the two photos - have been kept as crops. Belbury (talk) 16:17, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:21, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Vindhyaseries (talk · contribs)
[edit]suspicious photos without camera metadata.
- File:Manoj tiger.jpg
- File:Avinash Tiwari Actor Youtuber.jpg lol another version with a background is found as the avatar in https://in.bookmyshow.com/lakshmikantapur/movies/budhiya/ET00342984 .
- File:Manoj Tiger Actor.jpg
- File:Akanksha Dubey and Kanha Mishra.jpg
- File:Kamta-Mishra-p.jpg from facebook
RZuo (talk) 15:54, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:24, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Vindhyaseries (talk · contribs) 2
[edit]Likely not own works: 3 photos with 3 different cameras.
- File:Kanha Mishra with Sonu Sood.jpg
- File:Kanha Mishra Indian Actor Black Look.jpg
- File:Kanha Mishra Indian Actor.jpg
P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:30, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:57, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
and:
- File:20201111 Skånsk konjunktur - Kommunernas skatteintäkter (50588861228).jpg
- File:20201111 Skånsk konjunktur - Arbetslöshet i Skåne (50589595666).jpg
- File:20201126 Covid-19 skatt oresundspendlare (50648079543).jpg
- File:20201126 Covid-19 skatt oresundspendler (50648988611).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as w:en:Help:Table to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:23, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by Tim The Good2007 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Self-made out of scope fantasy insignia
- File:Coat of arms of the House of Glücksberg-Windsor.png
- File:Flag of a restored Kingdom of France (concept Proposal).png
- File:Flag of an Ancien régime style French Monarchy Under Louis XX.png
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
GPinkerton (talk) 16:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:22, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This order does not exist and has never existed. Not in scope : commons is not a depository for personnal inventions. 2A01:CB00:D26:F600:C63:E02B:45E7:2EB6 19:01, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:32, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Old photograph. No date and no information on photographer; cannot be ascertained if this is free here in the Philippines (50 years after the photographer's death) or worse, if this was still copyrighted in 1996, may also be copyrighted in the United States. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 19:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:33, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
no permission Anntinomy (talk) 21:50, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:35, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Logo CoffeeEngineer (talk) 23:31, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, and out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:35, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Unused, hoax content uploaded by inactive editor Liz (talk) 23:54, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:35, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Possibly a copyright violation, file is taken from https://counterstrike.fandom.com/wiki/File:Jess_cliffe.png , where it also has no source or license. JonasTisell (talk) 02:35, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- No valid licence from the uploader.
- However what's the licence on the source wiki? Looks like it's CC-by-sa, which would be acceptable. https://counterstrike.fandom.com/wiki/Counter-Strike_Wiki Andy Dingley (talk) 02:56, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, Fandom do not assure CC BY-SA for non-text files. See [3]. emk (talk) 07:09, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- It's not just Fandom's call though. The people running the Counter-Strike wiki on the Fandom platform can easily require a more-free licence than Fandom's basic restrictions. They've stated that "Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted." which would meet our needs here.
- Or you might also choose to simply not trust them to maintain this, because the web is so often simply wrong. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:01, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Fandom automatically inserts "Community content is available under ..." to all pages. So the message does not necessarily mean that the community extends CC BY-SA to non-text contents. emk (talk) 14:33, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, Fandom do not assure CC BY-SA for non-text files. See [3]. emk (talk) 07:09, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: copyright issues. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
No FoP for "graphic works" in Hong Kong A1Cafel (talk) 08:10, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:07, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Per COM:FOP Spain: non-free indoor mosaics by Marko Ivan Rupnik.
- File:Guadalajara - Parroquia de El Salvador, mosaico de Marko Ivan Rupnik (1) 01.jpg
- File:Guadalajara - Parroquia de El Salvador, mosaico de Marko Ivan Rupnik (1) 02.jpg
- File:Guadalajara - Parroquia de El Salvador, mosaico de Marko Ivan Rupnik (1) 03.jpg
- File:Guadalajara - Parroquia de El Salvador, mosaico de Marko Ivan Rupnik (1) 04.jpg
- File:Guadalajara - Parroquia de El Salvador, mosaico de Marko Ivan Rupnik (1) 05.jpg
- File:Guadalajara - Parroquia de El Salvador, mosaico de Marko Ivan Rupnik (1) 06.jpg
- File:Guadalajara - Parroquia de El Salvador, mosaico de Marko Ivan Rupnik (1) 07.jpg
_01.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_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}
_07.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
TadejM (t/p) 12:41, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:11, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Violates COM:SCOPE and COM:NOTHOST. We're maybe here to record the historical existence of the Ammann brothers and their posing for newspaper photos with a car that they claimed to run on "free energy". But anything beyond that is very dubious, and this script (the author and uploader's own invention) is well past that, into fantasy. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:24, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Comment. This file is in use in drafts on two different projects. IronGargoyle (talk) 15:36, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - nonsense. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:39, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Vigour magazine 191.126.40.223 02:34, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:40, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Per COM:FOP Spain: non-free indoor mosaics by Marko Ivan Rupnik.
- File:Capilla del Santísimo en la Catedral de la Almudena. Madrid, España.jpg
- File:Catedral de la Almudena, Madrid (España) 10.jpg
- File:Catedral Santa María la Real de la Almudena,Madrid,Comunidad de Madrid,España. (8543297862).jpg
- File:Madrid 0853 (19959394259).jpg
- File:P1040696 Espagne, Madrid, la Catedral Santa María La Real de La Almudena, Capilla del Santísimo, la pièce identifiée Maná (16403065863).jpg
_10.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
TadejM (t/p) 12:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:41, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
No information about the original image that was taken in 1976. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 16:42, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Добрый день! Это фрагмент оригинального моего снимка, сделанного мной на камеру "Зенит-Е" в 1976 году! С уважением, Annenkoan (talk) 05:05, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:42, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
There is no Freedom of Panorama in Russia for monuments. Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 16:46, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Добрый день! Ну, уж совсем-то телегу впереди лошади не надо ставить! Какое тут нарушение панорамы?! Позади что - стратегический объект?! Нет - речка Аскиз, на берегах которой родился сабж! О-ли! Annenkoan (talk) 05:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - The image violates the sculptor's copyright. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:43, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
These are three-dimensional artistic works (turtleback-designs on tombs). Located in w:en:Manila Chinese Cemetery, in a country with no freedom of panorama. The cemetery does not allow general public access, so fails future Philippine FOP (proposed in the Congress) that has the condition of "premises open to the public", which is not the case for interior of this cemetery of the Chinese community of the Philippines. Needs commercial license permission from the designers or their heirs.
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 19:42, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Why 02 but not 08? Because one is shiny and new, whilst the other is old?
- Keep I'm going to call these as utilitarian, not creative, i.e. not implicitly protected by copyright. They're distinctive as a group for the Chinese community of the Philippines (any broader?), but they don't display enough individual novelty to concern us. FoP is only needed if they're otherwise protected, it's not a general ban on photography. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:14, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: It is well established here that gravestones and tombs have copyrights -- images of them from non-FoP countries are deleted all the time. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:10, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Offenbar Fehllizenzierung - als Urheber wird angegeben HEAG Holding AG - Urheber kann aber nur eine natürliche Person sein Lutheraner (talk) 22:34, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Der eigentliche Urheber kann natürlich nur eine natürliche Person sein. In der Attributierung kann je nach Vereinbarung aber ein ganz anderer Name stehen. In diesem Fall braucht aber aber eine VRT Bestätigung. GPSLeo (talk) 19:54, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Fitindia. --Rosenzweig τ 12:41, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
there is no obvious free license ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 19:01, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
since this user has many problematic images(look his talk page), also metadata of that image is sussy and including "adobe photoshop" i nominate this file to deletion. ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 19:42, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Low quality COM:VAGINA photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 08:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Bleiben (Keep) the quality is high 2003:C4:4F0E:2800:15EF:69D2:3F72:4BFA 11:50, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Jesus f*cking Christ, what happened to this woman? Delete, likely to be trolling + copyright violation 2804:388:5071:A18A:9CD:9648:B171:8DC0 03:46, 23 January 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2804:388:A04B:9E70:C1E2:ABDF:6E3F:9223 (talk) 02:32, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
- What should be happend to this woman?? 84.139.218.34 22:38, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete there is nothing good about this image Dronebogus (talk) 05:13, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
DELETE. Clearly not an own work and one of too many. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 181.203.147.234 (talk) 21:26, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
I think the user who uploaded this image has been hijacked. His only upload of this kind and ten years after their last edit!!! — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 181.203.147.234 (talk) 21:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination --Lukas Beck (talk) 08:54, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo Herr Beck,
- das Bild stammt von mir selbst, also ich habe es selbst original fotographiert. Wie kann man auf die nicht nachvollziehbare Idee kommen, das Bild sei "Clearly not an own work", sei "hijacked" u.s.w. Gutenacht (talk) 10:33, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Ich zitiere mich gerne noch Mal selbst: "per nomination". Ich kann derzeit nicht beurteilen, ob das Bild dein eigenes Werk ist. Gemäß unserer Richtlinie Delete. Lukas Beck (talk) 13:48, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Ich zitiere mich gerne noch Mal selbst: "per nomination". Ich kann derzeit nicht beurteilen, ob das Bild dein eigenes Werk ist. Gemäß unserer Richtlinie
I am the uploader, the pic is from my own, not from the web and not hijacked !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gutenacht (talk • contribs) 10:30, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Kadı Message 18:43, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
_-_2021.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_2021.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The youtube channel doesn't own the right and simply uploaded a clip from a Twitch stream, "Adim" is not the author neither the copyright holder. Gyrostat (talk) 15:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
_-_2021.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:51, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
_-_2021.jpg){kind=link}
Latest files 191.125.173.236 18:02, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- prosím nemazat, obrázek je použit v článku o haně pavlové, bývaé manželce generála petra pavla Matěj Pohludek (talk) 18:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: "Latest files" is not a meaningful reason for deletion, but the uploader doesn't seem to be the photographer (source and author are given as zsmajakovskeho.cz / ZŠ Majakovského), so we would need a permission. And the image seems to be no longer in use. --Gestumblindi (talk) 14:43, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Andre Carrotflower as Speedy (selfie) Kadı Message 08:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Chris Dlugosz - mint hair (2451783403).jpg. Brianjd (talk) 09:31, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Seems to be educational as a demonstration of mint-color hair, and would thus be within COM:SCOPE. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:40, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep We dont have many images of mint colored hair--Trade (talk) 18:09, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: File has educational use and a similar DR was closed as kept. --Abzeronow (talk) 15:47, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Photo of the proper coat of arms of inferior quality and resolution VileGecko (talk) 10:01, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Weak keep. They are not exactly redundant, as the coloring is slightly different, so I lean weakly towards keeping. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:22, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellywa (talk) 20:24, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
I made a mistake in the table at the right bottom of the photo, and I have fixed the error and uploaded it again. but this one has the wrong indicators and should be deleted. LordReco (talk) 21:42, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- OK, so I have no idea what's going on here. You've uploaded four files:
- We should keep one of these files, and it should be an SVG format (we don't need a PNG here if we have SVG). It should be the one without error. So we should delete three of these, keep just one.
- Which is the good one? Andy Dingley (talk) 22:05, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, deleted the file mentioned by uploader. Kept the other 3 as uploader did not comment. --Ellywa (talk) 20:23, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
Urheberrechtlich geschütztes Foto ohne Freigabe durch den Fotografen Jbergner (talk) 10:12, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellywa (talk) 20:05, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
in here, https://www.turkpress.co/node/43481 it says: Posted on December 25, 2017 but this file is 2022 file? but... i cant find bigger resolution in internet. also in here, https://tasova.bel.tr/tasova-tarihi/ , the url of image is: https://i1.wp.com/tasova.bel.tr/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/tasova.jpg?resize=300%2C199&ssl=1 , look "2020/02". i mean... there is something, thats why i put this image to nomination instead speedydelete. ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 19:10, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, likely copyright violation. Uploader did not comment, regrettably. So the image must be deleted for now. Hopefully the uploader can show they made this photo in 2017. --Ellywa (talk) 20:10, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded from npgallery.nps.gov or catalog.archives.gov
[edit]- File:Monte Vista Lookout Cabin 01.jpg (This one and two following are okay, as photos by T.Dyess of w:Coronado National Forest, a Federal employee in the w:USFS (probably a ranger) as now cited in w:Monte Vista Lookout Cabin.)
- File:Monte Vista Lookout Cabin 02.jpg
- File:Monte Vista Lookout Cabin 03.jpg
- File:W. D. Martinez General Merchandise Store 01.jpg (not PD: this and two following are 1992 photos by private person per NRHP nom doc cited in article w:W. D. Martinez General Merchandise Store)
- File:W. D. Martinez General Merchandise Store 02.jpg (Not PD)
- File:W. D. Martinez General Merchandise Store 03.jpg (Not PD) Onel5969, can you pls signify your agreement about this and two above, here? Thanks for your cooperation below and elsewhere. I want to start making some progress here, would like to get these ones deleted and then keep working along. --Doncram (talk) 21:44, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- File:Evergreen Cemetery1.jpg (not PD: this and one following, both uploaded from https://npgallery.nps.gov/GetAsset/7d8a7814-49a5-46ba-b15f-55c7d1ebee1b PDF at NPS of the site's 16 NRHP-document photos], are photos taken in 2003 by Melissa Huber, Keith Walzak, Gretchen Voeks (who are not NPS or other Federal employees, but rather have association with University of Arizona or are entirely private). This is clearly presented in NARA's PDF of NRHP document combining text and photos, which also includes the set of 16 photos and is now used in the article w:Evergreen Cemetery (Bisbee, Arizona) as a reference (that reference won't display properly here, but its nowiki text string is: <ref name=NPS>{{cite report|type=none| url=https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75609662 | publisher=[[National Park Service]] |pages=5 | title=National Register of Historic Places Registration: Evergreen Cemetery |author1=Melissa Huber|author2=Jason Fox|author3=Jacob Lauderdale|author4=Renee Villareal|author5=Gretchen Voeks|author6= Keith Walzak|author7=R. Brooks Jeffery |date=June 22, 2005 |access-date= November 2, 2022}} Includes maps, aerial photos, and photos from 2003.</ref>).
- File:Evergreen Cemetery2.jpg (Not PD: Onel5969, can you pls signify your agreement about this and one above, here? --Doncram (talk) 21:44, 5 February 2023 (UTC) )
- File:El Paso and Southwestern Railroad Passenger Depot.1.jpg
- File:El Paso and Southwestern Railroad Passenger Depot.2.jpg
- File:WalterDouglasHouse.001.jpg (Not PD after all. Photos by private person taken in 1999, per NRHP document which is a reference in article w:Walter Douglas House. Onel5969, can you pls signify your agreement about this set of 7 Walter Douglas House ones, here? --Doncram (talk) 04:07, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
- File:WalterDouglasHouse.002.jpg (Not PD)
- File:WalterDouglasHouse.003.jpg (Not PD)
- File:WalterDouglasHouse.004.jpg (Not PD)
- File:WalterDouglasHouse.005.jpg (Not PD)
- File:WalterDouglasHouse.006.jpg (Not PD)
- File:WalterDouglasHouse.007.jpg (Not PD)
- File:Douglas Sonoran Historic District.1.jpg
- File:Douglas Sonoran Historic District.2.jpg
- File:Douglas Historic District.G Avenue.1984.jpg
- File:Douglas Historic Gadsden Hotel.1984.jpg
- File:Douglas Historic District.1984.jpg
- File:Crowley House.1986.jpg
- File:Benjamin E. Briscoe House.1986.jpg
- File:Bisbee.Aerial.jpg
- File:Bisbee Residential District.ca1900.jpg
- File:Bisbee Womens Club.2002.jpg
- File:Bisbee.1908Fire.jpg
- File:Bisbee.BreweryGulch.1904.jpg
- File:Bisbee.BreweryGulch.1904.jpg
- File:Bisbee.ca1895.jpg
- File:Bear Spring Reservoir.1981.jpg
- File:Bear Spring Guardhouse.1981.jpg
- File:Bear Spring House.ca 1981.jpg
- File:Bear Spring House.ca 1915.jpg
- File:BarefootLookout.jpg
- The above 33(?) or 36(?) may be all those in the uploader's history having "npgallery" in their edit summaries, such as "Uploaded a work by Janet Gibson from https://npgallery.nps.gov/GetAsset/d998a33b-53ca-4d0f-a7b9-35848a519b7b/ with UploadWizard". However, I see some more which can't be identified that way, including:
- File:Eagar School 1-1.jpg, which was uploaded with just "User created page with UploadWizard". The copyright for this appears to be owned by R. Graham or Ryden Architects per section on "Photos" in NRHP nomination document. Also I am concerned about possible copyvio of text used in Wikipedia at Eagar School and other articles (which must be an issue for Wikipedia, not Commons, and is now raised as an issue at uploader's Wikipedia talk page).
- And including at least some of the following:
- It must be noted that some of the above (50 or so now in count) may be okay, may actually be in the public domain or have other acceptable licensing. --Doncram (talk) 19:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request: the copyright status of w:National Register of Historic Places-related photos at npgallery.nps.gov or at catalog.archives.gov has been misunderstood by one recent uploader (and who knows how many recent other uploaders) who used the Commons' Upload Wizard and selected "public domain" status. Photos included with NRHP nominations are almost always NOT in the public domain, and almost always need to be deleted from Commons. Copyright status of all of the above needs to be checked, and they will probably all be verified to be NOT in the public domain. [About the first three, I am sorting out facts and references within editing at w:Monte Vista Lookout Cabin, and I need to further evaluate a long document at https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75609252 before I can fully sort out the situation. Topic is a lookout station in a national forest built by the United States Forest Service, and photos may have been take by a USFS ranger (and be PD) rather than by the principal author of NRHP nomination (would not be PD, depending on more).]
I recently placed {{Copyvio}} templates (which are effectively speedy-deletion requests) at 5 recent uploads (File:Schilling Ranch Historic District.001.jpg, File:Schilling Ranch Historic District.002.Rock House.jpg, File:Schilling Ranch Historic District.003.Hay Barn.jpg, File:Schilling Ranch Historic District.004.Bunk House.jpg, and File:Schilling Ranch Historic District.005.Tack Room.jpg) but there exist more ill-informed uploads in the uploader's history, and likely also in others'. Restating with small revision what I wrote elsewhere about those: The assertion displayed by template {{PD-USGov}} which was placed on the Schilling photo pages states "This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties under the terms of Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 105 of the US Code," but that is NOT TRUE. In particular the photos of Schilling Ranch Historic District were taken by a private person (or they are at least not identified as a Federal employee) and copyright belongs to them (or possibly another party such as the property owner if the work was done under contract). Note the template further states "Note: This only applies to original works of the Federal Government and not to the work of any individual U.S. state, territory, commonwealth, county, municipality, or any other subdivision", consistent with the fact that if the photos were provided by the Arizona state employee who was also involved in the NRHP nomination, they would not be in the public domain. The completed NRHP nomination document does seem very Federal-like, and the National Park Service did obtain copyright permission in the NRHP application process for the Federal government to post the photos on their own websites, but NRHP application simply does not release photos into public domain. See guidance at w:Wikipedia:WikiProject_National_Register_of_Historic_Places/Resources#NRHP_nomination_forms and perhaps elsewhere in that WikiProject NRHP help resource, and one can see many previous discussions in archives of [w:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places], and probably also in past Commons discussions. I advised the uploader at their Wikipedia Talk page of the problems, including with comment that I regard their misunderstanding to be really not their fault, due to lack of clarity and sometimes-downright-misleading representation provided by the National Park Service in the past. Now I see the above-listed questionable photos are also in their Commons contributions history.
Big question 1: Is there any way that Commons uploads in the last year, say, can be scanned to identify other uploads, perhaps by scanning edit summaries for text strings "catalog.archives.gov" or "npgallery.nps.gov"? Note:
- File:Schilling Ranch Historic District.001.jpg, which is not PD, was uploaded with "Uploaded a work by Louise Henderson from https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75607953 with UploadWizard"
- File:W. D. Martinez General Merchandise Store 01.jpg, which is not PD, was uploaded with edit summary "Uploaded a work by Janet Gibson from https://npgallery.nps.gov/GetAsset/d998a33b-53ca-4d0f-a7b9-35848a519b7b/ with UploadWizard"
- It has been a common occurrence over the 15 years I have edited Wikipedia on NRHP topics, that new editors arrive and misunderstand and apply PD tags in photos that should not in fact be uploaded. (Again often because of unhelpful or even obtuse representations by some not-properly-informed National Park Service staff.) Probably Commons editors' awareness of these situations waxes and wanes, and may be on the too-much-waned side now.
- Perhaps there is some more appropriate forum to raise this question, if so please advise.
Big question 2: Can the UploadWizard itself be modified to check for those strings in URLs, in order to stop such uploads from happening, or at least to throw in some hurdles? Note:
- Sometimes, although rarely, there are NRHP nomination documents which include photos that actually are PD, for having been created by a w:National Park Service or other Federal employee, or by a w:Historic American Buildings Survey photographer under contract to a Federal agency. Early in the NRHP program, NPS employees wrote many nominations and took the photos. Nowadays that is rare, but old nominations still have those PD photos, and while Wikipedia articles for most of them have been created and include recent or old photos, it is still possible that the old nominations can be mined for their older PD photos.
- Perhaps there is some more appropriate forum to raise this question, if so please advise.
Whew, that's a lot. Thank you for considering. --Doncram (talk) 17:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for bringing this to my attention. All I can say in my defense, was that I was given some bad advice several years ago, and no one has caught this until now. I had been told that if it was published on a .gov website, it was PD. My apologies to have caused you all this effort. In the future, unless told differently by the outcome of this discussion, I'll know not to add any photos taken subsequent to 1927 that are published on US.gov websites, which have non-employee attributions. Onel5969 (talk) 21:23, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
More files to be looked at:
- File:AlpineElementarySchool1.jpg
- File:AlpineElementarySchool2.jpg
- File:AlpineElementarySchool3.jpg
- File:AlpineElementarySchool4.jpg
These were taken by Pat Stein, who was not an NPS employee.Onel5969 (talk) 21:41, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
- File:AllentownBridge-1.jpg is not PD, as analyzed in some detail by me at User talk:Onel5969. --Doncram (talk) 10:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- Greetings. I have no issue with any of Doncram's suggestions regarding copyvio issues.Onel5969 (talk) 15:46, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. I just now requested speedy deletion on 12 photos, using the following tag (which I might recycle for more batches in the future):
- {{copyvio|1=Please delete as not Public Domain after all. Per cooperative discussion with uploader at [[Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded from npgallery.nps.gov or catalog.archives.gov]], where uploader just gave blanket agreement (at bottom) after invited to comment specifically about 12 photos in 3 photosets. There are more to evaluate further there; these 12 are resolved however.}}.
- and with edit summary: speedy deletion request as copyvio, per {{copyvio|1=Please delete as copyvio per [[Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded from npgallery.nps.gov or catalog.archives.gov]]
- --Doncram (talk) 22:14, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. I just now requested speedy deletion on 12 photos, using the following tag (which I might recycle for more batches in the future):
[[|thumb|right|Walter Douglas House, in relation to Bisbee]]
- Yay, that worked. User:Túrelio (thanks!) apparently deleted the 12 files and ran "Filedelinkerbot" (or the bot ran itself?) to delete the usages of the files in articles, such as this deletion in Wikipedia of one of the files in the w:Walter Douglas House article. Oh, i see it deleted the entire file usage, including the caption, so there's no trace remaining of what photo was once located there.... it deleted the entire [[File:WalterDouglasHouse.001.jpg|thumb|left|Walter Douglas House, in relation to Bisbee]] I thought it might have left a blank photo box, kinda calling for someone to get a new photo accomplishing the same thing. For better or worse, that's apparently how the bot-process works. An alternative would be for us to manually remove the file call, and leave the now-empty photo box in place, which in this case would like like the empty box to the right here... --Doncram (talk) 03:48, 8 February 2023 (UTC)