Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2023/03/31
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
I made error, this Is Vanja Milinković Savić. Can someone fix it or delete to upload same image with his name? Vux33 (talk) 05:37, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 07:07, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
I made error, this Is Vanja Milinković Savić. Can someone fix it or delete to upload same image with his name? Vux33 (talk) 05:38, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 07:07, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
I know there's a copy... Marvelvsdcvscapcomvssega (talk) 06:37, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 07:06, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
My own work? 186.175.79.222 11:45, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Subidor request. 186.175.79.222 11:45, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Speedy delete per at least 4 edits by User:Bunga Katuk and per nom. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:00, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom & uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 12:09, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
This image is an oddly photoshopped version of an official portrait, and has no use. Compusolus (talk) 07:19, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy. Vandalism... 181.43.4.47 14:02, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: speedily: Intentional vandalism, en:Obama–Trump voters was already reverted. --Achim55 (talk) 14:18, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
I am almost certain this is taken from elsewhere without permission and not the uploader's own work. The clearly visible watermarks make it obvious, though I can't find an exact match online. Uploader has a history of copyright violations. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:02, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 20:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
owner has uploades by mistake Seavagabond (talk) 22:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 07:09, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own works, or under a free license.
- File:I found the most DANGEROUS edible... 2.webm
- File:BRNXDRILLMIX.ogg
- File:Junior H x Peso Pluma x Luis R Conriquez x Natanael Cano - El de la EME (Music Video).ogg
- File:I found the most DANGEROUS edible.ogg
- File:You Know My Name.ogg
- File:La La La.ogg
- File:Same Thug Song.ogg
- File:I Must Be High.ogg
- File:SPM- Screwed Up Tape.ogg
- File:SPM vs Los.ogg
- File:Medicine.ogg
- File:Vogues.ogg
- File:High Everyday (Screwed).ogg
- File:Stay on Your Grind (Screwed).ogg
- File:Red Beams and Rice.ogg
- File:SPM- Latola.ogg
- File:Fuerza Regida X Angel Ureta - Otro Amanecer (Oficial Video).ogg
- File:Fuerza Regida X Marca Mp - Tu Ventana (Oficial Video).ogg
- File:Grupo Los De La O - Area 81 ft. Gerardo Ortiz (Video Oficial).ogg
- File:Más Bélico Que el Diablo.ogg
- File:Whiskey Con Agua - Fuerza Regida ft. Junior H.ogg
- File:Grupo Los De La O - Mentiras Ft. Ivan Cornejo (Video Con Letra).ogg
- File:Grupo Los De La O - Tony F (Video Con Letra).ogg
- File:Ella Baila Sola - (Video Con Letras) - Eslabon Armado y Peso Pluma - DEL Records 2023.ogg
- File:Grupo Los De La O - Seguimos Más fuertes Ft. Legado 7 (Video Oficial).ogg
- File:Grupo Los De La O - El Triple (Audio Oficial).ogg
- File:Future & Gunna - Pluto (unreleased).ogg
- File:Young Nudy - Portabella (Official Audio).ogg
- File:Yng Lvcas & Peso Pluma - La Bebe (Remix) (Video Oficial).ogg
- File:Fuerza Regida - CH Y LA PIZZA (AFTER EN EL CAMERINO) (CON BANDA).ogg
- File:Junior H x Peso Pluma - El Azul.ogg
- File:Future - Red Leather.ogg
- File:Sin Rencores.ogg
- File:Jdot Breezy - No Name Dropping (Official Music Video).ogg
- File:Jackboy - If You Knew (Official Video).ogg
- File:Aretes.ogg
- File:Lil Bebe mix.ogg
Yann (talk) 12:46, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Obvious sock of Lola474747. --Yann (talk) 14:35, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
copivio was attached,but I think “this file is PD-logo”. 鼓天 (talk) 02:38, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Just in case, I uploaded monochrome logo.--鼓天 (talk) 06:29, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted, not a textlogo. Monochrome may be OK (maybe not). Taivo (talk) 17:56, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Mapuana Makia Keoladonaghy (talk) 07:52, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: G7. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:58, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Which one is own work? 186.172.122.205 19:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Krd. --Rosenzweig τ 08:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Qué significa FBMD? 186.173.124.58 09:51, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Comment Taken from Facebook. And this file was therefore redeleted. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:59, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Krd. --Rosenzweig τ 19:48, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Facebook 186.172.122.205 19:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Krd. --Rosenzweig τ 08:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
FBMD@MD ? 186.173.124.58 10:10, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Krd. --Rosenzweig τ 19:47, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
a new file was uploaded there was a mistake in this one Natacha LSP (talk) 10:24, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 19:48, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
a new file was uploaded there was a mistake in this one Natacha LSP (talk) 10:25, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 19:48, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
著作権マークがある 高専研究会 (talk) 18:06, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 19:45, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
I see that I made a mistake in misunderstanding the license, so, as the uploader, I want to say that I have no objection to speedy deletion. My apologies for my error. Tryptofish (talk) 19:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: done. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:19, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
ошибочная загрузка Yulem (talk) 19:15, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 19:43, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Self-promotion. Commons is not your personal free web host.
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO.jpg
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 29.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 38.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 37.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 36.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 35.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 34.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 33.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 31.jpg
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 30.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 25.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 24.jpg
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 23.jpg
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 22.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 21.jpg
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 20.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 19.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 18.jpg
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 17.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 16.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 15.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 03.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 04.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 05.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 14.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 13.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 12.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 11.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 10.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 08.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 09.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 07.png
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO 01.jpg
Achim55 (talk) 22:12, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Per the nominator. Plus there might possibly be copyright issues around images of the interfaces of the apps. Although I think the images being out of scope is enough to justify their deletion regardless. --Adamant1 (talk) 12:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 20:45, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
out of project scope
- File:LOGO MUSIC.jpg
- File:ERICKSON STANDING BRAND GEAR.jpg
- File:UN DE MES LOGO DE MUSIC LABEL.jpg
- File:Les PRODUCTION ERICKSON.jpg
- File:DJ ERICK DANTONIO CHILDREN ELI ET ALIA D'ANTONIO.jpg
Didym (talk) 20:46, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:18, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
a new file was uploaded there was a mistake in this one Natacha LSP (talk) 10:24, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 20:01, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
There's already a more correct image of a Ukrainian bicycle mandatory road sign 
WWBM (talk) 20:45, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- I did make a request for file merging before this DR, but this file can also be deleted if deemed preferable. Fry1989 eh? 14:06, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Merged the files. --Sreejith K (talk) 02:02, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Complex logo Trade (talk) 00:58, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:13, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Logo owned by the New Zealand Electricity Authority (https://www.ea.govt.nz/). New Zealand's TOO is pretty low so licensing to PD-logo might not be an option given the logo is not just simple text. Salavat (talk) 01:28, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
This image is a passport photo. In the United States, passport photos are provided by the applicant. So the photo is copyrighted by Andrew Anglin or by a photographer he hired and is not freely licensed. Streamline8988 (talk) 02:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hello, even if that was the case, the image lacks any creative input from the photographer and is also under the public domain under the same basis. NAADAAN (talk) 02:16, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Keep On second thought I think NAADAAN is right. Passport photos are subject to strict composition rules so there's no creative input. I withdraw my nomination. Streamline8988 (talk) 14:57, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Kept: withdrawn. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Photoshoot 186.173.105.21 02:44, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete "Photoshoot" as an author and source is not valid. Single upload of account that is now blocked on en.wikipedia. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:06, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:14, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
extremely blurred, unlikely to be useful Lukas Beck (talk) 05:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Poor quality photo of non-notable person. I followed The Username Policy (talk) 06:07, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Personal photo without educational use Drakosh (talk) 06:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Personal photo without educational use; offencive title Drakosh (talk) 06:24, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused logo, promotional Lymantria (talk) 07:11, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused logo Lymantria (talk) 07:12, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Suspected copyright violation: file EXIF shows "Copyright holder © MBDA / DGA EM / 2012 Usage terms Please contact Alain Gortais before using". MKFI (talk) 07:25, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
a new file was uploaded there was a mistake in this one Natacha LSP (talk) 10:22, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
a new file was uploaded there was a mistake in this one Natacha LSP (talk) 10:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Not educationally useful Emu (talk) 11:42, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:19, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
No educational value, spam Emu (talk) 11:43, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:19, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
No educational value, unused, spam Emu (talk) 11:44, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:19, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope Emu (talk) 11:45, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:19, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope Emu (talk) 11:45, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:19, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope Emu (talk) 11:45, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Deleting, no es alemana. 186.175.79.222 11:50, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:19, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Unused, out of scope Emu (talk) 11:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:19, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
File:'About 8 30 AM September 11, 2001' -- Guided Tour of the 9 11 Memorial Museum New York (NY) April 2016 (26687086403).jpg
[edit]COM:DW of a copyrighted artwork A1Cafel (talk) 12:31, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:20, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
COM:DW of a copyrighted newspaper A1Cafel (talk) 12:39, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:20, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
No FoP for 3D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 12:43, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:20, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 12:45, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 12:46, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 12:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 12:48, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in France A1Cafel (talk) 12:50, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in France A1Cafel (talk) 12:52, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 12:55, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
No realistic educational value Headlock0225 (talk) 13:30, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
No FOP Iran. MehdiTalk 13:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
The Motherland Calls appears to be the main subject here. Authored by w:en:Yevgeny Vuchetich and installed in 1974, it is situated in Russia, that does not provide commercial freedom of panorama for non-architecture. A permission of free license from the heirs of Vuchetich is required. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:15, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
The Motherland Calls appears to be the main subject here. Authored by w:en:Yevgeny Vuchetich and installed in 1974, it is situated in Russia, that does not provide commercial freedom of panorama for non-architecture. A permission of free license from the heirs of Vuchetich is required. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:17, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
The Motherland Calls appears to be the main subject here. Authored by w:en:Yevgeny Vuchetich and installed in 1974, it is situated in Russia, that does not provide commercial freedom of panorama for non-architecture. A permission of free license from the heirs of Vuchetich is required. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:20, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
The Motherland Calls appears to be the main subject here. Authored by w:en:Yevgeny Vuchetich and installed in 1974, it is situated in Russia, that does not provide commercial freedom of panorama for non-architecture. A permission of free license from the heirs of Vuchetich is required. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:22, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:22, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
The statue was completed in 1967 by Yevgeny Vuchetich (1908–1974) and Nikolay Nikitin (1907–1973). There is no freedom of panorama in Russia for 3D artworks. The copyright term of the country lasted for 70 years, and it can be undeleted in 2045 A1Cafel (talk) 07:00, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- As we just got notice of this nomination at en.wikivoyage, I appreciate that this photo has not been deleted yet. I would suggest waiting for Wikipedians to locally upload this photo for the Wikipedia article where it's used. After they do, it can be deleted. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:43, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Not in use at wikivoyage now. --Ellywa (talk) 22:58, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
The Motherland Calls appears to be the main subject here. Authored by w:en:Yevgeny Vuchetich and installed in 1974, it is situated in Russia, that does not provide commercial freedom of panorama for non-architecture. A permission of free license from the heirs of Vuchetich is required. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:24, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- There are no such rules in Russia, photos of monuments and their publication are allowed freely, including in the media. В России нет таких правил, фото памятников и их размещение разрешены свободно, в том числе и в СМИ. Для публикации собственноручно сделанного фото не требуется никакого дополнительного разрешения. A.Morgunovskaya (talk) 15:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- @A.Morgunovskaya: are you sure? Russian copyright law contains a provision that states commercial uses of images of monuments still in copyright are not allowed. See this online copy of Article 1276 in Russian language, with the restriction found at (1). Wikimedia Commons does not accept non-commercial content. The 2014 introduction of unrestricted FOP only introduces architectural FOP. By the way, Russian FOP-related deletions have been ongoing for more than 10 years. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:12, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- I rely on my experience as a journalist. Photos like this, including with this monument, were used by me for publications in the media. Also, such photos were repeatedly published by other authors, photographers, in many publications that are familiar to me. In the event that the monument is located in the public domain, no permissions are required for the publication of its photo, and no claims have ever been made for such publications. Posting self-made photos is a constant practice in the work of photographers. The exceptions are monuments placed on someone's private territory. Я полагаюсь на свой опыт работы журналистом. Фото, подобные этому, в том числе с данным памятником, были использованы мною для публикаций в СМИ. Также подобные фото неоднократно публиковались другими авторами, фотографами, во многих изданиях, которые мне знакомы. В случае, если памятник расположен в открытом доступе, на публикацию его фото не требуется никаких разрешений, и ни разу за подобные публикации не было предъявлено претензий. Размещение собственноручно сделанных фото является постоянной практикой в работе фотографов. Исключением являются памятники, размещенные на чьей-либо частной территории. A.Morgunovskaya (talk) 22:44, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- I think it might matter who took the photo, but I can't be sure if it does. Journalists have the right to photograph monuments and buildings without any additional permission in all cases, except for those related to military installations and other objects, access to which is provided under a special regime. The author-photographer can freely publish such photos in various publications, including receiving a fee for this. Я думаю, возможно, имеет значение то, кем сделано фото, но не могу быть уверена, что это так. Журналисты имеют право фотографировать памятники и здания без какого-либо дополнительного разрешения во всех случаях, кроме тех, которые связаны с военными объектами и другими объектами, доступ на который обеспечивается по особому режиму. Такие фото автор-фотограф может свободно публиковать в различных изданиях, в том числе получая за это плату. A.Morgunovskaya (talk) 22:48, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- @A.Morgunovskaya: while you are a journalist as you claim, Wikimedia Commons is not a media in which the sole purpose is to inform or to report. Commons is a media repository that hosts commercially-licensed media (either in public domain or free licensing) in which all media are licensed to be reused commercially. Even if you and your fellow peers (fellow journalists) agree to the use of commercial licensing in your photos, you cannot do that in the case of your photos of The Motherland Calls, which is not in public domain, because the last-surviving artist isn't yet dead for more than 70 years. Note that in the context of visual arts copyright is a private right of the artist, even if the artwork is owned by the government or placed in public spaces. The government and the people of Russia only owns the recent monuments, but the artistic copyright is still held by the heirs or estate of the artists, unless there is a tangible evidence of copyright transfer, usually in writing.
- Russian copyright law only provides limited freedom of panorama exception, found at Article 1276. The Russian architectural FOP (1276.(2)) that was introduced in 2014, with the help of Wikimedia Russia chapter's efforts, it does not apply to works that are not architectural. So unfortunately the likes of The Motherland Calls cannot be photographed commercially. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 23:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- With regards to this monument, I managed to find the following information: "The Civil Code of the Russian Federation prohibits registering as a trademark images of cultural heritage objects, which include the sculpture on Mamaev Kurgan."
- That is, this sculpture has already been classified as a cultural heritage site. Касаемо данного памятника, мне удалось найти вот такую информацию: "Гражданский кодекс РФ запрещает регистрировать в качестве товарного знака изображения объектов культурного наследия, к коим относится и скульптура на Мамаевом кургане. "
- То есть данная скульптура уже отнесена к объектам культурного наследия. A.Morgunovskaya (talk) 22:56, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- @A.Morgunovskaya: trademark is different from copyright. The artist's copyright is the one we are talking about. Copyright subsists even in cultural heritage public art of Russia. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 23:05, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- @A.Morgunovskaya: are you sure? Russian copyright law contains a provision that states commercial uses of images of monuments still in copyright are not allowed. See this online copy of Article 1276 in Russian language, with the restriction found at (1). Wikimedia Commons does not accept non-commercial content. The 2014 introduction of unrestricted FOP only introduces architectural FOP. By the way, Russian FOP-related deletions have been ongoing for more than 10 years. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:12, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:25, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
No FoP for 3D works in Russia A1Cafel (talk) 04:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:06, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
out of Project Scope and questionable licensing. Lukas Beck (talk) 15:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:25, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom.svg. Fry1989 eh? 15:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:23, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by AntiCompositeBot as no license (User:AntiCompositeBot/NoLicense/tag). Metadata indicates a Public Domain Mark, which may be true for Germany but this 1935 newspaper would have had its US copyright restored by URAA. Abzeronow (talk) 15:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:23, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Copyrighted Materials Michel Bakni (talk) 19:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:26, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Copyrighted Materials Michel Bakni (talk) 19:24, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:26, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Not educationally useful SurinameCentral (talk) 23:12, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Not educationally useful SurinameCentral (talk) 23:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Not educationally useful SurinameCentral (talk) 23:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Not educationally useful SurinameCentral (talk) 23:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Not educationally useful SurinameCentral (talk) 23:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Not educationally useful SurinameCentral (talk) 23:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Entrepreneur 186.172.104.252 23:20, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Derechos de © 186.172.104.252 23:22, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Derechos de © 186.172.104.252 23:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:28, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Not CC0. May be {{PD-USGov}} if the w:en:Civil Air Patrol, a Congressionally-chartered non-profit, counts as the U.S. Government. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:35, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:29, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused company logo - promotional Lymantria (talk) 07:54, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:29, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Image not found at source Lymantria (talk) 08:30, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:29, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
No FOP Iran. MehdiTalk 08:36, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:29, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Not found at source Lymantria (talk) 09:45, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:29, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Not found at source. Lymantria (talk) 09:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:29, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
"Photo by Quentin Kruger (Contractor)". A contractor is not a government employee so DOE license is invalid. Abzeronow (talk) 16:10, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:29, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Flickr metadata indicates photographer is Camilla Sjodin. I haven't found any information that she is a federal employee. She owns a photography business. https://www.elitephotographygroup.com/las-vegas-photography-services/about/ Abzeronow (talk) 16:21, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Image not found at source, unlikely as self portrait. Lymantria (talk) 16:49, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
We don't keep .pdfs of images, and I don't know if this file would be within Commons scope anyway. Abzeronow (talk) 17:19, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
No evidence of a free license at the source. Yann (talk) 18:56, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
No evidence of a free license at the source. Yann (talk) 18:57, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
The image seems problemstic: it was removed from a Wikipedia article in 2017 under the claim "Removed the image Jokerman.png it's copyrighted without permission." A reverse image search shows typeface samples of the same type for other typefaces at fonts.com. So likely this image comes from fonts.com. Likely unfree image. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 19:10, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:30, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
out of scope? Trade (talk) 01:38, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Permission required. --Tulsi 24x7 13:54, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused logos, no educational value, promotional.
- File:Beyonk.png
- File:YourDiamonds.svg
- File:Online Shop Mark (White).png
- File:Online Shop Mark.png
- File:Cozy.co.uk C logo from Shoppable Inc.png
- File:Cozy.co.uk logo from Shoppable Inc.png
- File:Cozy.co.uk logo in white from Shoppable Inc.png
- File:Cozy.co.uk logo from Shoppable Inc.jpg
- File:Dropshyp abbreviation design DP in White Red from Shoppable Inc.png
- File:Dropshyp White Red Logotype by Shoppable Inc.png
- File:Dropshyp abbreviation design "DP" from Shoppable Inc.png
Lymantria (talk) 09:58, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Tulsi 24x7 13:58, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
no benefit to community. fetish post. Wkipede (talk) 17:59, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:19, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
What on earth? I appreciate that she's got a mask on, but the quality is so low anyway that it looks more like a bizarre AI-generated glitch. We can barely see her face at all, so what's the point?! Ubcule (talk) 18:20, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Andy Dingley (talk) 19:14, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 12:48, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Adilusman009 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Not own work: low-res/web-size images with disparate quality and styles, missing or inconsistent EXIF data, some obvious DW photos of existing photos. All photos of same person, unlikely that uploader was present at all these diverse places and times.
- File:Mohammad Usman (Veteran Congress Leader).jpg
- File:Preparation ahead of Rahul Gandhi's road show in Old Lucknow.jpg
- File:Chowk Youth at Rahul Gandhi's road show in Old Lucknow.jpg
- File:Annu Tandon and Team at Usman's Residence in Old Lucknow.jpg
- File:Workers at Usman's Residence to Welcome Shri Rahul Gandhi.jpg
- File:Congress Workers at Rahul Gandhi's road show in Old Lucknow.jpg
- File:Welcome of Shri Rahul Gandhi's road show at Mohammad Usman,s Residence.jpg
- File:Rahul, Annu and Usman at Congress Road Show in Lucknow.jpg
- File:Shri Mohammad Usman and Shrimati Annu Tandon.jpg
- File:Internal House meeting at Shri Mohammad Usman residence.jpg
- File:Salman Khurshid, Mohammad Usman and Sanjay Singh at Senior Congress Meet, in Lucknow.jpg
- File:PM of India;Shri Rajiv Gandhi in Election Campaign for Mohammad Usman from Lucknow West.jpg
- File:Shri Usman s son and Governor of UP,Shr Motilal Vohra.jpg
- File:UP Chief Minister Narendra Dutta Tiwari and UP Congress Secretary Shri Mohammad Usman.jpg
- File:Senior Congress Leader Shri Mohammad Usman an MLA Shyam Kishore Shukla.jpg
- File:Shri Mohammad Usman s daughter and Prime Minister Shri Rajiv Gandhi.jpg
- File:Senior Congress leaders, Salman Khurshid, Mohammad Usman and Sanjay Singh.jpg
- File:Mohammad Usman and Salman Khurshid.jpg
- File:Mohammad Usman campaigning for Mayor election of Prof. Manzoor Ahmad.jpg
- File:Mohammad Usman campaigning for Mayor election.jpg
- File:Mohammad Usman and Mayor candidate from Lucknow Prof. Manzoor Ahmad.jpg
- File:Senior Congress Leaders Shri Mohammad Usman and Shri Jagdambika Pal.jpg
- File:Shri Mohammad Usman and Muslim Leader Maulana Khalid Rashid at press conference.jpg
- File:Senior Congress Leader of Uttar Pradesh Shri.Mohammad Usman and Governor Shri.Motilal Vohra.jpg
- File:Shri Mohammad Usman and Muslim Leader Maulana Khalid Rashid.jpg
P 1 9 9 ✉ 22:04, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 12:48, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Commons:Nudity#New uploads of nude photo, not special enough to be educationally useful A1Cafel (talk) 03:16, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep We dont have many nude photos from this period of time (1970s). The posing itself is decent enough --Trade (talk) 00:36, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy delete, copyvio. First found on August 18, 2020, according to TinEye. RodRabelo7 (talk) 13:40, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: NETCOPYVIO from here. --Эlcobbola talk 14:38, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
copyright Jupallymukesh (talk) 15:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete above COM:TOO US —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:43, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Questionable own work claims. Note that the user has uploaded many copyright violations.
- File:Ayatollah Vaezzadeh.jpg
- File:Hvaezadeh2015.jpeg
- File:Vaezzadeh Global Economic Leaders 2012.JPG
HeminKurdistan (talk) 15:37, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:44, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Looks like a random selfie rather than an official portrait, possibly out of project scope A1Cafel (talk) 16:14, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:44, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Looks like a random selfie rather than an official portrait, possibly out of project scope A1Cafel (talk) 16:14, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:44, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Unused suspicious personal photo, out of project Zafer (talk) 17:00, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:45, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Copyrighted Material - liviing person Michel Bakni (talk) 19:44, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violation. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:45, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
Docs of Soviet Com.Party are not official docs in the terms of Russian copyright law. Alex Spade (talk) 17:33, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. Soviet law excluded from copyright official documents issued by both state organizations and non-governmental organizations (see article 134 of 1991 law [1]). Party card is an official document issued by such organization. Related discussion: ru:Википедия:Форум/Авторское право#Партбилет КПСС. --M5 (talk) 09:45, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
- Berne Convention do not allow such exemption. Alex Spade (talk) 11:38, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Closing as stale. Can be renominated without prejudice. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:02, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
Party card is not an official documents of state government agencies and local government agencies of municipal formations. Yellow Horror (talk) 01:34, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- The provision on the exclusion of official documents of public organizations from copyright, which existed in the legislation of the USSR, became invalid after the accession of the Russian Federation to the Berne Convention. Details in the discussion in Russian here: ru:Википедия:Форум/Архив/Авторское право/2020/03#Партбилет КПСС.--Yellow Horror (talk) 11:24, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- I don't care enough to read that whole thing. But can you tell me whose copyright exactly is being violated? Synotia (talk) 21:03, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- «Whose copyright is violated» is completely irrelevant. Copyright law protects the rights of both known and unknown authors. What matters to Wikimedia Commons is that there is no legal basis for considering the document to be in the public domain.--Yellow Horror (talk) 18:49, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- I don't care enough to read that whole thing. But can you tell me whose copyright exactly is being violated? Synotia (talk) 21:03, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Spurious DRs with invalid rationale. See M5's argument in the previous nomination. Yann (talk) 12:28, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Spurious DRs with invalid rationale. See M5's argument in the previous nomination. --Yann (talk) 12:29, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
This is the official DVD cover of the movie, which is copyrighted, and the uploader does not hold the copyright. Mondo (talk) 21:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per nominator. It's a Dutch version of the 2001 animated film based on the television series, Recess: School's Out. - The Harvett Vault | he/him | user | talk - 02:52, 1 April 2023 (UTC); edited: 02:55, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wutsje 00:49, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Stock image with screen image pasted in, not (entirely) the uploader's work. Other examples online, e.g., https://www.macobserver.com/news/apple-seeds-third-developer-betas-of-latest-operating-systems-meaning-public-betas-could-launch-soon/ Adeletron 3030 (talk) 23:10, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- {{subst:delete2|image=File:Nespresso Error Code 17205.webp|reason=Stock image with screen image pasted in, not (entirely) the uploader's work. Other examples online, e.g., https://www.macobserver.com/news/apple-seeds-third-developer-betas-of-latest-operating-systems-meaning-public-betas-could-launch-soon/}} ~~~~ Juliet Parker (talk) 10:51, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 13:35, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Porn 85.176.12.7 09:20, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- Keep View of vulva does not make it porn -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:39, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
- Keep agree - Wikimedia is one of the rare non-porn sources on the net where people get to see pictures of an organ (namely the vulva) they usually do not get to see. Hence this collection of vulvas has indeed educational value 212.27.185.253
Kept. as per above. Yann (talk) 16:41, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Low quality COM:VAGINA photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 03:11, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Not bad as a thumbnail, and a pretty good example of a vulva with copious pubic hair. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:04, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep It’s perfectly fine Dronebogus (talk) 05:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. ✗plicit 03:49, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Commons:Nudity#New uploads of nude photo, not special enough to be educationally useful A1Cafel (talk) 03:17, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete amateur porn of the worst quality Dronebogus (talk) 05:30, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ✗plicit 03:47, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Infographics from a sales pitch where the positive impact is marked with the company's logo and product packaging pictures in this volume are out of scope. Subject's article deleted twice as spam on cswiki. Kept the logo and one photograph.
- File:Adam Dostál - zakladatel.jpg
- File:Grig cvrččí chipsy.png
- File:Velikost plochy ve čtverečních metrech nutné pro produkci 1 kg bílkovin.png
- File:Grig Sušení cvrčci různé příchutě.png
- File:Grafické znázornění průměrné produkce skleníkových plynů připadajících pro výrobu 1 kg bílkovin.png
- File:Grafické znázornění obsahu bílkovin, železa a vápníků mezi cvrčkem a skotem.png
- File:Grig Sušení červíci různé příchutě.png
- File:GRIG cvrččí pomazánka.png
- File:Grafické znázornění množství litrů vody pro chov jednotlivých druhů hospodářských zvířat.png
- File:GRIG chilli con carne.png
- File:Zakladatel Adam Dostál.jpg
- File:Logo firmy Grig.jpg
- File:Podnikatel Adam Dostál.jpg
- File:Grig cvrččí chilli con carne.jpg
- File:Cvčci Grig.jpg
- File:Červici mix Grig.jpg
- File:Počet litrů vody pro chov jednotlivých druhů hospodářských zvířat.jpg
- File:Grig cvrččí pomazánka.jpg
- File:Grig cvrččí chipsy.jpg
- File:Porovnání živin skot vs. cvrček.jpg
- File:Čtvereční metry nutné pro produkci 1 kg bílkovin.jpg
- File:Průměrná produkce skleníkových plynů připadajících na výrobu 1 kg bílkovin.jpg
- File:Grig-logo.png
TFerenczy (talk) 08:15, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete advertising --Gampe (talk) 17:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 03:44, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own works or under a free license.
- File:Duckworth kendrick lamar.ogg
- File:Lpb poody.ogg
- File:Anonymous hotboii feat. lpb poody.ogg
- File:Ah ha lil durk.ogg
- File:Z code rico cartel feat. hotboii.ogg
- File:Solo future.ogg
- File:No love nba youngboy.ogg
- File:Early morning jaydayougan.ogg
- File:B1tch k j dot breezy.ogg
- File:Still think about you a boogie.ogg
- File:Drake passiofruit.ogg
Yann (talk) 12:42, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 03:46, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Kudukomusic01 (talk) 15:50, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 03:40, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
This work, somehow similar to a COM:TOY, is not permanently displayed and therefore cannot benefit from COM:FOP Germany. 2804:[…]:317E 15:57, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ✗plicit 03:51, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
pornography 86.247.179.94 21:08, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Six years old image, is categorized correctly and of adequate quality. This is exactly what is supposed to be seen in the category Nude or partially nude people holding clothing. Richiex (talk) 07:22, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. ✗plicit 03:42, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Handsome Wikipedian since 11 days, regrettably no useful contributions anywhere. 181.43.4.47 15:17, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:59, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
no realistic educational value Headlock0225 (talk) 15:35, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:59, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
out of scope, photo of random men with nonsensical description Bestalex (talk) 17:09, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Kind of cool photo, but yeah, absolutely ridiculous file description, which needs to be deleted if we decide to keep the photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:20, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:00, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Unexplained photo of a TV screen showing unidentified object. No educational value. Note from 2016 says it is to replaced when better photo is avaiable Malcolma (talk) 17:41, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:00, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
no realistic educational value Headlock0225 (talk) 17:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:01, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Atrocious quality, numerous better examples of subject. Ubcule (talk) 18:10, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:01, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Юрий Д.К. as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: Accidental upload. Sure, but why delete it now, it seems like a good photo to me? —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've nominated the foto because of low quality. However if you disagree with me, feel free to keep it. Юрий Д.К 20:44, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: courtesy deletion of poor unidentified image. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:02, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Unused logo, no educational value, out of scope. Zafer (talk) 21:03, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:02, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Freedom of Panorama in Japan only applies for buildings. Lukas Beck (talk) 15:18, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Per COM:FOP Japan: The statues is not a building. And the statues made in 2003 are copyrighted. --Missinglinkthinking (talk) 22:16, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yasu (talk) 15:15, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
Image plagiarized from website (https://wprc.info/). Daraku K. (talk) 19:12, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yasu (talk) 15:18, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
Copyrighted image Leokand (talk) 08:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: No license since 2023-03-17. For more information read the introduction of COM:L, about essential information and about Internet images. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:32, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Not "own work", admitted at the Teahouse David10244 (talk) 05:10, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and OoS. --Gbawden (talk) 11:31, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
album cover, most likely protected by copyright Lukas Beck (talk) 07:52, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- I purchased a license to use the underlying graphic of the guitars and the rest of the image is of my own creation. Keoladonaghy (talk) 07:57, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- This graphic is the cover of my own band's musical EP release. Keoladonaghy (talk) 08:06, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- I am the found of the group whose album this is! Keoladonaghy (talk) 08:34, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Can you give us a prove? Lukas Beck (talk) 09:18, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Moheen. --Rosenzweig τ 19:38, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
The uploader cited a Twitter link for permission to upload the photo, but at the link you can see that the photographer did not actually publish the photo under an appropriate license. Sunnya343 (talk) 02:55, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Эlcobbola talk 21:03, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
Foto Eno De Wit 186.173.209.119 01:38, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Rosenzweig τ 15:08, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Incorrect licensing Ken Tony (talk) 09:50, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Yann. --Rosenzweig τ 10:04, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Sahaib as no permission (No permission) Krd 04:54, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy delete – This file is cropped from a copyvio file (File:Mixed Doubles National Champion.jpg) which has already been deleted in March this year. Note that the pic in question is cropped from the following Facebook post: https://www.facebook.com/poojatabletennis/photos/pb.100050656021769.-2207520000./1676742535925909/ - NitinMlk (talk) 07:45, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:44, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Юрий Д.К. as Speedy (Db) and the most recent rationale was: Accidental upload. But it's still a nice photo, why delete it now? —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; while normally I would do this as a courtesy deletion, the uploader is not the photographer, so it's very likely that someone else will upload this Flickr image anyway. —holly {chat} 16:56, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Self portrait of a person that died in 1987. Uploader is not an author. Copyright violation Masti (talk) 20:54, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Prośba dotyczy autoportretu Pawła Jakubowicza. Autor jest byłym dyrektorem I LO w Rzeszowie, obraz został namalowany i podarowany szkole. Publikuję go za wiedzą i pozwoleniem obecnej dyrekcji I LO. Proszę o usunięcie blokady ilustracji. Leszek Stępniak (talk) 14:33, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Leszek Stępniak: aby móc załadaować kopię portratu konieczna jest zgoda autora. Jak takiej zgody udzielić opisane jest np. na stronie pl:Pomoc:Pozwolenia na wykorzystanie. Obecnie w opisie autorem jest osoba zmarła więc nie mogła udzielić zgody ładując samodzielnie grafikę. Masti (talk) 16:27, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 16:52, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Copy of WWI YMCA Eagle Hut plaque at Bush House, Aldwych, November 2022.jpg No Swan So Fine (talk) 21:11, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; @No Swan So Fine: next time, use {{Speedydelete}} for an uploader-requested deletion (G7) or duplicate (G8). —holly {chat} 16:52, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Lacks metadata+ found on internet before commons https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/uv-online/baykar-offers-a-first-look-at-bayraktar-tb3-ahead-of-the-ucavs-first-flight/ Shadow4dark (talk) 21:15, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- The original source of the Image is Seljuk Bayraktar on his twitter account. https://twitter.com/Selcuk/status/1640167857089568770 Midgetman433 (talk) 04:01, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Midgetman433 it is not free-licensed! ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 19:40, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 16:49, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Not own work no metadata+ https://gagadget.com/en/uav/210191-the-bayraktar-kizilelma-uav-with-a-ukrainian-engine-took-to-the-skies-for-the-second-time/ Shadow4dark (talk) 21:27, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; @Shadow4dark: next time use {{Copyvio}} for a faster response. —holly {chat} 16:49, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
This maps is not based on any reliable sources. It is used to spread dubious idea that parts od Bosnia formed part of Serbia in 1918 which is hard to verify. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 16:48, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Imagen derivada 186.174.34.68 22:07, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; photo of Heckler is too large to be de minimis. —holly {chat} 16:47, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
© 2023 WMAZ-TV. All Rights Reserved. Bookish Worm (talk) 22:25, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 16:46, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
© 2023 WMAZ-TV. All Rights Reserved. Bookish Worm (talk) 22:26, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 16:46, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by MrsSnoozyTurtle as Copyvio (SD) and the most recent rationale was: F1|2= Company logo claimed to be "own work". Also, the resolution is too high for Fair Use claims. Below COM:TOO US, but is it below COM:TOO UK (and therefore {{PD-textlogo}})? —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Hello Commons editors. It has been about a month since this issue was raised, could someone please look into my concerns about this logo that was uploaded as "Own work"? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 00:20, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Probably below TOO UK, but I deleted the draft article on en-WP as having been abandoned, so I deleted this as well. —holly {chat} 16:45, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Kenrick95 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Non-free logo; own work disputed. COM:TOO? —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep I would think this would be a textlogo. Seputar Jambi is a program on Jambi TV. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:12, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: COM:TOO Indonesia says TOO there is low, but surely this will be below it. —holly {chat} 16:41, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
See File_talk:Our_Lady_of_Ipswich.jpg
Deleted: No source given on the en-WP page in the initial 2008 upload. —holly {chat} 16:39, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
obvious copyvio Ur Nan123 (talk) 17:35, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:46, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Copyright: seems unlikely to be the uploader's own work. ColinFine (talk) 17:36, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment. This is the banner page of the printout of a run of a software product. As such, I didn't think anything on it was copyrightable: it's just standard information about version number and options being used, arranged in a standard layout. So in the same way that company logos can be uploaded to Commons if they have a simple design and do not pass the threshold of originality, I figured this banner page could too. Jonathan Schilling (talk) 22:45, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep: Copyright-ineligible text, not a "literary work", just rote listings of commands, software titles, license information, version numbers, dates, etc. See {{PD-text}}. DigitalIceAge (talk) 05:26, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:46, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —holly {chat} 17:48, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Is an audio recording that comes from a video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wmk6fvcJDA. It was published in 1964 by CBC.It is not 'own work' nor is there a CC license at source.
However, this does bring up a valuble question. If the author is considered to be the CBC than the copyright stands. If the copyright belongs to the unknown individual who recorded the video, than it could be Public Domain as it was published prior to 1970. If that's the case it can be re-uploaded on a Wiki project, as it still is not free in the US or allowed on the commons. PascalHD (talk) 18:48, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; from what I can tell, non-governmental copyrights in Canada belong to the individual author, not the company they work for, so {{PD-Canada-anon}} could possibly apply, but only if the CBC doesn't have any record of the videographer, and someone would have to do the legwork to find that out. —holly {chat} 17:46, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Wird Komerziel genutzt,und ich werde nicht erwähnt in irgend einer weise, trotz aufforderung. 2003:C7:EF19:1440:1DB:A768:D639:249A 19:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Wenn du Ulrich Eschenauer bist, dann logge dich bitte ein. --Achim55 (talk) 19:58, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion: assuming nominator is the uploader, license declarations are irrevocable and file is in use; if the nominator is NOT the uploader, then there really is no valid reason here. —holly {chat} 17:41, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Copyright? In this single contribution of the user is given in the metadata "Auteur Daniel Baud Auteursrechtenhouder https://danielbaud.com" The name of the author in the file description differs from that in the metadata. The link danielbaud.com gives an error PR_END_OF_FILE_ERROR. Wouter (talk) 20:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- hello here are 2 links directeing to the author, Daniel Baud
- https://2ndevie.fr/a-propos-2ndevie/
- https://www.behance.net/agencebaud/info 46.18.124.176 13:51, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as it appears the uploader is not the author, and the file is unused anyway, so I'm not going to put in a lot of effort to contact Daniel Baud to get a confirmation. —holly {chat} 17:38, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Tokyo Ghoul logos
[edit]The color of the text is far too detailed and complex to meet the criteria of PD-textlogo.
- Indeed, the Movie may be so. but, I think”Manga version Logo is 2 colors only,So no problem”.
- Just in case, I uploaded monochrome logo.--鼓天 (talk) 06:29, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; COM:TOO Japan says "a text logo needs to have artistic appearance that is worth artistic appreciation" and IMO the colors of the manga logo would put it above. I ordered a universal replacement with the monochrome version. —holly {chat} 17:12, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
No {{PD-text}} or {{PD-shape}}. The shape of the F with a very specific outline (it seems to be the outline of Guatemala) with human figures carrying it is no longer a simple F, therefore it exceeds the threshold of originality. Taichi (talk) 20:37, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- i am not so sure since it is used on official ballots Braganza (talk) 13:15, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; this would be above the very generous TOO US, even. —holly {chat} 17:07, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sejarawan128 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Small images without EXIF data, very unlikely to be own works.
- File:Settlements of communities around mountains in the West Java region of Indonesia.MP4.jpg
- File:Mil mi 35 hind Indonesian army2017.jpg
- File:Sarinah Jakarta Environment2020.jpg
- File:Exchange of Paspampres guards at the state palace2016.jpg
- File:Lon non color picture1970s.jpg
- File:Sundanese Islamic children who are studying religion together2022.jpg
- File:Flag ceremony routine activities in Indonesian schools2022.jpg
- File:Activities of children who are studying in the mosque2022.jpg
- File:Pictures of children studying at the Indonesian mosque2022.jpg
- File:Asy-Syifa Mosque in Indonesia2022.jpg
- File:Indonesian locomotive2022.jpg
- File:The situation in the Sribaduga fountain area2022.jpg
- File:The atmosphere of the Indonesian traffic road 2022.jpg
Yann (talk) 20:48, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for the suggestion, next time this photo will be included with the EXIF data Sejarawan128 (talk) 21:37, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sejarawan128, can you add EXIF data? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:17, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Delete Since the images are clearly copyvio given the differences in image quality between them and the fact that they come from varying geographical areas of the planet. I doubt the uploader visited both Sudan and Indonesia in 2022. Maybe, but doubtful. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:21, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I don't know about your second remark. Is it so hard to believe an Indonesian could visit the Sudan? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:41, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- Normally? No. But the user has a history of uploading copyvio. So its unlikely in this specific case, which is really the only one that matters. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:56, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- OK, but then nothing is relevant except that history. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:50, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: Totally. Yann should have just made the users history clear from the beginning, instead of acting the DR was just or only about the lack of EXIF data. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:23, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- OK, but then nothing is relevant except that history. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:50, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- Normally? No. But the user has a history of uploading copyvio. So its unlikely in this specific case, which is really the only one that matters. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:56, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete - given the history of copyright violations, and that File:Mil mi 35 hind Indonesian army2017.jpg is a crop of an image that can be found here. -- Whpq (talk) 02:07, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep No policy based reason given for deletion. See Commons_talk:Deletion_policy#"Small_images_without_EXIF_data" if you want to claim that it is.
- Even worse, this is just gatekeeping (yet again) to find reasons to ban new editors here before they've hardly begun.
- If any of these are crops from web images (i.e. actual copyvios) then claim that, not just some invented non-reason for deletion, and also give some evidence to back that up, such as the original source.
- What we should not do (but regularly do) is keep doing these bulk deletions for a non-reason, and a non-reason ("EXIF is mandatory") that we don't warn editors of, before they start uploading. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:47, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- "Small images without EXIF data" is symptom. Given that File:Mil mi 35 hind Indonesian army2017.jpg is most probably an image from the Indonesian Air Force claimed as "own work", and that everything else is a copyright violation, it is most probable that these images are also copyright violations. This is very different than a user in good standing with a few images without EXIF data, in which case, the lack of EXIF would not be a reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 11:14, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- "everything else is a copyright violation" See? You're just handwaving.
- If you want to claim "everything is a copyright violation" then you have two choices: either show this (show a link to the Indonesian Air Force source image – it's probably this), or else have the editor declared as "outlaw" (which we do very rarely). You can't just fall back on false reasons like "no EXIF".
- Now maybe every image here is a copyvio, like the helicopter one. I haven't checked, and until I've checked to some plausible level, I'm just not permitted (by AGF if nothing else) to pretend that it is, ands certainly not by inventing fake deletion policies, just to save myself some work.
- There are some things that are bigger issues than copyright checking a handful of images: behaving properly towards other editors, including new editors, is one. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:23, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- I've personally verified several of this editor's uploads were copyright violations. A number were taken directly from youtube videos, and it's clear from the .mp4 in the names of said files (I found an exact match from a Youtube video not licensed in a way Commons can use, using google for one now-deleted image). Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:01, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- "Small images without EXIF data" is symptom. Given that File:Mil mi 35 hind Indonesian army2017.jpg is most probably an image from the Indonesian Air Force claimed as "own work", and that everything else is a copyright violation, it is most probable that these images are also copyright violations. This is very different than a user in good standing with a few images without EXIF data, in which case, the lack of EXIF would not be a reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 11:14, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete I've confirmed several of this user's uploads were copyvios. They claim to have been unaware they could not simply take images from the internet and upload them to Commons. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:02, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- User:Yann, please change the deletion reason to "Nominated for deletion because since this user has previously violated copyright, we have to assume all their uploads violate copyright." Then block then from making uploads, as it's obviously pointless to allow them to upload anything if everything they upload will be deleted, purely based on their track record. However, until you change the deletion reason, I think the only policy-based thing to do is Keep all and a procedural close. You are in violation of policy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:57, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- How the EXIF data show copyright violations: File:Asy-Syifa Mosque in Indonesia2022.jpg (00:04, 19 February 2023 in Indonesia, although this is obviously not the night, and uploaded on 18 February), File:Sundanese Islamic children who are studying religion together2022.jpg (16:22, 19 February 2023 in Sudan). The shortest flight takes 18 hours. So the EXIF is obviously wrong. But why uploading images with fake EXIF data? Yann (talk) 15:51, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- What time zone is the 00:04? If UTC, it wouldn't be in the night in Indonesia. 16 hours later in Sudan seems a stretch, but I suppose the clock can have had a wrong date because of battery problems or whatever, and been corrected. I think few people correct the EXIF timestamps after having reset the clock. Too many unlikely events of course make a copyvio seem a more probable explanation, but you shouldn't draw hard conclusions based on inconsistent EXIF. –LPfi (talk) 17:19, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yann, your stated deletion reason is against policy. Give a deletion reason at the top that is consistent with policy, instead of making different arguments in the response thread when challenged. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- You are misunderstanding the policy. Lack of EXIF data is a symptom, which shows why these are probable copyright violations. Now it is for the deleting admin to decide if this symptom is sufficient for deleting these or not. Yann (talk) 19:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- But there is no policy. You've been reminded of this repeatedly.
- Why can't you give an honest deletion rationale? Why do you keep hiding behind this untrue, deceptive one? What purpose does that serve?
- It's not even true that there's no EXIF. Several of these have fairly large EXIF data, albeit useless. It shows that they were edited online, using Picsart. Now is that a reason for deletion? Are we now excluding editors on the basis of, "You're using cheap tools that we don't think a Real Photographer would bother with"? Andy Dingley (talk) 20:01, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- I am not misunderstanding the policy. The policy is stated very plainly and clearly. Your deletion reason is directly against policy. If the closing admin were to delete these files "per nom," they would be compounding the violation of policy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:11, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- You know this is quite funny. I am here since the beginning of the project, and I am certainly the one most arguing against deletion for invalid reasons. I always look for a reason to keep uncertain images, while most people look for a reason to delete them. So I would certainly be happy if these images are kept, but 1. uploader didn't answer to this request; 2. they didn't upload even one original image with EXIF data. Only one of this may convince me to withdraw this, but nothing has come so far. Yann (talk) 21:14, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- This is not about the deletion of a handful of images. It's about repeated deletion listings by someone who thinks, "I don't have to give a reason, I've been here too long to worry about the rules for the little people". Andy Dingley (talk) 22:14, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not arguing to keep the images, Yann. I'm stating clearly that your deletion reason is against policy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:17, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- This is even more silly. You don't really care about these images. So if you are just looking for a scape-goat, pass your way. Yann (talk) 22:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- You think expecting admins to follow policy is a joke? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:26, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- No. I think that, for a reason which I can't fathom, you are making a mountain out of a molehill, and looking for a squabble for the sake of argument. Stop it, I have some more important work to do. Yann (talk) 22:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- Either it's policy that "small images, no EXIF" is not a deletion reason by itself or it's not. The clear language of policy is that it is not a deletion reason. If you want to make it one, you should propose a policy change, but when admins violate policy, why should we expect anyone else to respect it? You don't understand me: I am willing to tolerate policies I don't like, to a point, but what really bothers me is when those who are supposed to uphold policies violate them routinely. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:21, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- This arguing over timestamp is silly, camera clocks are almost never adjusted for time changes, whether the photographer enters a new time zone or a switch like daylight savings comes into effect. I haven't touched my camera clock ever, nor will it update if I travel to a different country/continent. ɱ (talk) 17:15, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- Either it's policy that "small images, no EXIF" is not a deletion reason by itself or it's not. The clear language of policy is that it is not a deletion reason. If you want to make it one, you should propose a policy change, but when admins violate policy, why should we expect anyone else to respect it? You don't understand me: I am willing to tolerate policies I don't like, to a point, but what really bothers me is when those who are supposed to uphold policies violate them routinely. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:21, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- No. I think that, for a reason which I can't fathom, you are making a mountain out of a molehill, and looking for a squabble for the sake of argument. Stop it, I have some more important work to do. Yann (talk) 22:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- You know this is quite funny. I am here since the beginning of the project, and I am certainly the one most arguing against deletion for invalid reasons. I always look for a reason to keep uncertain images, while most people look for a reason to delete them. So I would certainly be happy if these images are kept, but 1. uploader didn't answer to this request; 2. they didn't upload even one original image with EXIF data. Only one of this may convince me to withdraw this, but nothing has come so far. Yann (talk) 21:14, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- I am not misunderstanding the policy. The policy is stated very plainly and clearly. Your deletion reason is directly against policy. If the closing admin were to delete these files "per nom," they would be compounding the violation of policy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:11, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- You are misunderstanding the policy. Lack of EXIF data is a symptom, which shows why these are probable copyright violations. Now it is for the deleting admin to decide if this symptom is sufficient for deleting these or not. Yann (talk) 19:23, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yann, your stated deletion reason is against policy. Give a deletion reason at the top that is consistent with policy, instead of making different arguments in the response thread when challenged. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- What time zone is the 00:04? If UTC, it wouldn't be in the night in Indonesia. 16 hours later in Sudan seems a stretch, but I suppose the clock can have had a wrong date because of battery problems or whatever, and been corrected. I think few people correct the EXIF timestamps after having reset the clock. Too many unlikely events of course make a copyvio seem a more probable explanation, but you shouldn't draw hard conclusions based on inconsistent EXIF. –LPfi (talk) 17:19, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
I think the problem here is in how different people read the situation, not really in the deeper understanding regarding these images.
What Yann thinks they say, when writing "Small images without EXIF data, very unlikely to be own works." is probably
- Here are some problematic files, very unlikely to be own works. Some have missing or inadequate EXIF, others have other problems, and none of these files seems to actually be own work.
That's a lot to write, and Yann trusts that the closing admin will know how to read between the lines, and trust Yann to have done the evaluation. Somebody may raise valid points in the discussion, but otherwise it is a clear case.
Now, IK, Andy Dingley and I are not as good at reading between the lines (or just don't like having to do that), and want transparent procedures, where the reasons stated are the real reasons. Yes, in this case it is making a mountain out of a molehill, but that's because the real thing, being able to trust Commons admins and procedures, indeed is a mountain.
I hope Yann can back off a bit from their defences, and see that thinking twice before hitting "publish" on the deletion request or deletion closure, checking that the deletion rationale is formally valid (and true by the letter as well as in spirit) can help immensely in avoiding frustration among some parts of the community.
I think the issue to a very large extent lies in the difference between trusting admins and procedures on one hand, and having to trust them on the other. The former is nice, the latter is awkward.
–LPfi (talk) 06:54, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- where the reasons stated are the real reasons.
- It's quite shameful that anyone would expect admins to do such a thing. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:06, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- Procedural close / Keep - nomination needs to be edited, or entry needs to be renominated. The current nomination has no policy-based reasoning to delete. ɱ (talk) 17:18, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- The missing context is that this user has had a number of files deleted as blatant copyright violations. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:09, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- Right, so that should be given as the deletion reason, but then they should probably be blocked from uploading more files in the future on the same basis. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:09, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, they should be blocked, but I am not an administrator. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:56, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
- Right, so that should be given as the deletion reason, but then they should probably be blocked from uploading more files in the future on the same basis. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:09, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and COM:PCP. As for the discussion about nomination procedures and stated reasons, it seems like a waste of time and unnecessary red tape to go through when in all likelihood these will just end up being deleted for the "proper" reasons, so why not just cut to the chase? While I agree that it would be better to give actual sound policy-based reasons, it's already been over 5 months since they were nominated before anyone could get around to closing this, so to force Yann to renominate and then wait another 5 months is silly. —holly {chat} 17:06, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Blowball
[edit]- File:Отзыв Дидур.jpg — scan of a letter
- File:1 старт.jpg — scan of a letter
- File:2 пара.jpg — scan of a letter
- File:1 ЛДМ.jpg — this one looks like photo of a TV screen
- File:1 ЛДМ Макс.jpg — this one the same
- File:Фетисов Кремль.jpg
- File:Duyball big.gif — this looks like scan of a magazine or a book
- File:Дуйбол моно.jpg
- File:Дуйбол 2 в 1.jpg — scan of a flyer
Photos of some local Russian sports that haven't gained notability for article. Some of these files (for example, scans of 2000s documents and letters) are definitely not Own work so other uploads of this user are also rather questionable. --Красный wanna talk? 22:28, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:45, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by 62And2isSixty2 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Not own works. Unclear copyright status
Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:50, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:59, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Sahaib as no permission (No permission) Krd 04:53, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:59, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Very unlikely to be own work, and probable derivative work. Yann (talk) 07:54, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:59, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
This part "Your site must not contain advertising in any form (e.g. Google ads, banner advertisings, pop-up windows)
You are not allowed to use Travian: Kingdoms contents for making money (neither your fan-site should be a commercial service nor charge any costs from users)" in the linked post contradicts the commercial use permission in the license template.
TFerenczy (talk) 08:10, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Well, there are strange things about Wikimedia licenses. The first time I uploaded a picture I did myself on Wikimedia, it was refused because a CC-BY-SA-NC license was not accepted. Few days after I met somebody who told me he was Wikipedia administrator and that the problem was due to NC clause. So I put it on CC-BY-SA license, but it did not prevent me to find unfair the choice of Wikimedia to impose people who do a work for free to allow them, or anybody else in the world, to make money with this work. I would certainly spend more time creating photos for Wikipedia articles if CC-BY-SA-NC license was proposed, and I would certainly not be the only one.
- Now for Travian screenshots :
- Travian Games allows to use pictures from their websites if there is an indication saying theses pictures belong to Travian Games, and if this websites don't try to get money by any way.
- Wikipedia and similar websites as vikidia.org don't oblige people to pay something to access their content and don't also contain advertising in any form.
- So, there should be a way to use pictures from Travian Games on Wikipedia and similar websites. I spent time to search a good license and as it is necessary to use a predefined tag, I found the {{Attribution|....}} one. But why does it includes this boring and liberticidal (because restricting authors choices) commercial use, and all other use is permitted. mention ?
- If there is an alternative tag only saying it belongs to ... without authorizing commercial use, just put it instead, or if you don't have the required write access, tell me what change to do. It will be a more clever attitude than for File:Cathode_ray_tube_diagram_fr.svg which was just a translation of File:Cathode_ray_tube_diagram-en.svg but was deleted because as I could not access the wikicode of the English file license declaration, I had to put one, a work I did honestly, but the result did not please somebody.
- If there is presently no tag available to give Travian screenshots the correct user license, the question is why. It is not a question for Wikimedia administrators who just have to apply rules created by others but for Wikimedia managers. Bech (talk) 17:23, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Bech I see where you are coming from but that's just the way Commons is I am afraid. Some Wikipedias allow hosting local files with more strict licenses locally (including the French one it seems) but others do not and can only use files from Commons. TFerenczy (talk) 15:48, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Non-commercial licenses are not available on Commons. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:56, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Not found at source Lymantria (talk) 09:36, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:55, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
very bad quality, as long as this is not classified correctly, i dont see this in our Project Scope. Lukas Beck (talk) 09:52, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:55, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Edited photo of Jiří Babica from this interview with Frekvence 1, so it's clearly not a Ivo A. Benda from TV Žilina. RiniX (talk) 09:58, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete --Gampe (talk) 18:11, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:54, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- also File:Portada1947.jpg
Per COM:Spain, old Spanish non-photographical works are protected with copyright until 80 years from author's death. Author en:Luis García Sainz died in 1965. His works are protected with copyright in source country Spain until 2046 (80+1 years from death). Taivo (talk) 10:08, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination & added to Undelete in 2046. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:53, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
These are all small images with no EXIF. This user has a history of uploading copyvios from Facebook.
- File:Champ de coton.jpg
- File:Les étapes du processus du coton.jpg
- File:La floraison du coton 2.jpg
- File:L'offrande de la dot pour avoir la mariée.png
- File:La tenue traditionnelle des mariés.png
- File:Le Marié et sa femme tenue traditionnelle.png
- File:Mariage traditionnel( dot chez les adioukrous).png
- File:Mariage traditionnel adjoukrou.png
- File:Tenue traditionnelle chez les agnis bona.jpg
- File:IMG-20220414-WA0085.jpg
. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:54, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- vous avez effectivement raison ces photos on leur sources sur Facebook, mais jamais été exploitées pour une quelconque contribution. la raison de ces contributions sur ma page.image televersee avec permision des personnes Tiphabb (talk) 13:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Tiphabb Comment peut-tu prouver que les auteurs ont donné leur permission pour téléverser les images ici ? Anthere (talk) 00:21, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- Je ne pourrai donner de preuves pour convaincre réellement, mais elles ont dits oui quand je suis allée leur proposer de publier les photos surtout celles en tenue traditionnelle et le étapes du coton. Et en tout grande fut mon erreur. Tiphabb (talk) 03:52, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- Pour le coton c'est un ami à moi, comment le prouver donner moi des pistes s'ils vous plaît. Et je prends apte de ces erreurs de televerssement. Tiphabb (talk) 03:54, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- Bonsoir User:Tiphabb. En fait, ce n’est pas simple du tout. Tu trouveras le processus à suivre sur cette page : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Volunteer_Response_Team/fr Anthere (talk) 00:31, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Pour le coton c'est un ami à moi, comment le prouver donner moi des pistes s'ils vous plaît. Et je prends apte de ces erreurs de televerssement. Tiphabb (talk) 03:54, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- Je ne pourrai donner de preuves pour convaincre réellement, mais elles ont dits oui quand je suis allée leur proposer de publier les photos surtout celles en tenue traditionnelle et le étapes du coton. Et en tout grande fut mon erreur. Tiphabb (talk) 03:52, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- Tiphabb Comment peut-tu prouver que les auteurs ont donné leur permission pour téléverser les images ici ? Anthere (talk) 00:21, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:52, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
problem with the file, half of the image is missing Miniwark (talk) 13:28, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- don't know, what went wrong. I don't have this image anymore. But it is not so important. Dele it, if you want. --Berlinschneid (talk) 13:44, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- If it's an important building, the picture can be cropped. 181.43.4.47 18:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:51, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
copyright violation 水餃喵 (talk) 14:30, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:50, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Is this screen free to use? 181.43.4.47 15:15, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:50, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Yo también puedo subir mi foto, (firmando un cheque? :) 186.106.158.236 16:12, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —holly {chat} 17:52, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Unlikely to be the Flickr user’s work. Incorporates Lego product photo (see gallery at https://www.ebay.com/itm/175522047213?mkcid=16&mkevt=1&mkrid=711-127632-2357-0&ssspo=KQ5X3qFHTRe&sssrc=2349624&ssuid=&var=&widget_ver=artemis&media=COPY). Adeletron 3030 (talk) 16:13, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- The image linked above is not the same as posted by the flickr-user.--Blockhaj (talk) 16:20, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Since there has been no responce i will delete the delete request.--Blockhaj (talk) 21:06, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Adeletron 3030: could you please respond to your own deletion request.--Blockhaj (talk) 21:53, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- You're right, I thought I saw the same image but I was mistaken. I'm happy to withdraw this nomination. Sorry about the mistake. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 22:36, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Blockhaj Sorry to reoopen this thread, but despite the photograph itself seeming fine, COM:TOYS may apply to this and other images that you've uploaded. Many toys, figures especially, may be considered copyrighted three-dimensional art. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 01:06, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- These are construction sets and thus not strict toy models imo. I guess you can argue that each complex singular piece can be copyrighted, but put together they create something new. (As they say, copying from one is stealing, copying from several is research :P) Even if the set comes with a proposed pre-planned design, the set is not forcing the user to put the parts together as such, especially with bionicle, as the series features tons of combiner models and promotional non-set parts. That's like the whole brand shtick of Lego.--Blockhaj (talk) 01:40, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- I deem this discussion over.--Blockhaj (talk) 15:36, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Blockhaj Sorry again for not responding earlier. Sure, no Lego set forces you to build anything, this particular photograph shows a result clearly intended by the designers. It's not a case where the photographer/blogger created an original work.
- Anyway, DRs do take a frustrating long time to resolve. I guess you can contact a reviewer for an opinon? Adeletron 3030 (talk) 16:51, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Well you started this and i have no idea what a reviwer is, thus i feel its up to you to continue this discussion.--Blockhaj (talk) 17:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- The process is described at Commons:Deletion requests. An admin, not the uploader or the nominator, has to close the discussion. Until then, there's nothing you have to do, or can do, except make the case that there's no reason for deletion. You can also look at past discussions at Category:Toys related deletion requests to see cases where COM:TOYS has resulted in deletion or keep. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 19:04, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- Well you started this and i have no idea what a reviwer is, thus i feel its up to you to continue this discussion.--Blockhaj (talk) 17:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- I deem this discussion over.--Blockhaj (talk) 15:36, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
- These are construction sets and thus not strict toy models imo. I guess you can argue that each complex singular piece can be copyrighted, but put together they create something new. (As they say, copying from one is stealing, copying from several is research :P) Even if the set comes with a proposed pre-planned design, the set is not forcing the user to put the parts together as such, especially with bionicle, as the series features tons of combiner models and promotional non-set parts. That's like the whole brand shtick of Lego.--Blockhaj (talk) 01:40, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Blockhaj Sorry to reoopen this thread, but despite the photograph itself seeming fine, COM:TOYS may apply to this and other images that you've uploaded. Many toys, figures especially, may be considered copyrighted three-dimensional art. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 01:06, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- You're right, I thought I saw the same image but I was mistaken. I'm happy to withdraw this nomination. Sorry about the mistake. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 22:36, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Adeletron 3030: could you please respond to your own deletion request.--Blockhaj (talk) 21:53, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Since there has been no responce i will delete the delete request.--Blockhaj (talk) 21:06, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Per COM:TOYS. Clearly a derivative work. Di (they-them) (talk) 22:41, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:49, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Unlikely to be CC-licensed. It's probably below TOO anyway, but in any case this is completely redundant to File:WBZ-TV logo (2023).svg. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:19, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:48, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
This image is a campaign photo from the 1960s, and is a work of the Social Credit party - not 'own work' as claimed. No indication of free license at source, and is unlikely to be in the public domain in source country of Canada. Can be found here: https://archivessearch.twu.ca/robert-n-thompson-on-his-campaign PascalHD (talk) 16:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:48, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
obvious copyvio Ur Nan123 (talk) 17:35, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- The song was made in 1800s, its public domain. DinoSoupCanada (talk) 00:03, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- The song itself may be in the public domain, but this performance of it is not. Besides, the person who uploaded it to YouTube under the Creative Commons licence is NOT the original owner of the recording so the licence is invalid. Ur Nan123 (talk) 17:25, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Technical
[edit]If this was uploaded from a YouTube rip, then it's important to know that it was a compressed version uploaded here as a bloated FLAC file. If it is legal to use the music, then please just upload the original MP3 or OPUS here without further transcoding, unless you actually accessed the lossless copy. The same applies to the other related file tagged for deletion. For more, see Commons:File types#Sound. Thanks. --Esperfulmo (talk) 10:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination & no explanation of which group or orchestra is performing, so no way to know if the performance is copyright or not. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:47, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
Escudo erróneo de Alpicat Eriic13 (talk) 06:28, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- ¿Porqué? Xavigivax
(talk) 16:31, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
_-_Eigentum_des_Kunstmuseums_Gelsenkirchen.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(1).png){kind=link}
_April_2016_(26687086403).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}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
_-_Eigentum_des_Kunstmuseums_Gelsenkirchen.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_Eigentum_des_Kunstmuseums_Gelsenkirchen.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(1).png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(1).png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_(1).png){kind=link}
_(1).png){kind=link}
_April_2016_(26687086403).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_April_2016_(26687086403).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --VIGNERON (talk) 12:30, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
unclear copyright status, do we have any information about this portrait? At least, I guess, it should be clear, that this isn't own work. Lukas Beck (talk) 09:27, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- This portrait is my own familly, one of my greats mothers while French Revolution ! Jofdl (talk) 10:49, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- can you prove, that you are allowed to publishe it? Maybe a permission from the creator itselves? Lukas Beck (talk) 11:12, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I can. I took this photo myself. Jofdl (talk) 23:07, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- You took the photo, but who painted the portrait? They should be credited as the "author." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:02, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
- I dont understand the problem, this portrait is in my familly until 200 years and his author is unknowed until this time. Jofdl (talk) 05:38, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- Then give the name of the "author" as anonymous and an approximate composition date. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:39, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- I dont understand the problem, this portrait is in my familly until 200 years and his author is unknowed until this time. Jofdl (talk) 05:38, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
- You took the photo, but who painted the portrait? They should be credited as the "author." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:02, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I can. I took this photo myself. Jofdl (talk) 23:07, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- can you prove, that you are allowed to publishe it? Maybe a permission from the creator itselves? Lukas Beck (talk) 11:12, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --VIGNERON (talk) 12:27, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
possible copyvio (photo by Mike Cohen) M2k~dewiki (talk) 09:31, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, very likely copyvio and no proof of free license, plus unused as the article on deWP has been deleted. --VIGNERON (talk) 12:26, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Identical to Coutts, File:440 Strand, November 2022.jpg No Swan So Fine (talk) 11:08, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and as aksed by uploader. --VIGNERON (talk) 12:20, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
File:Andrieux - La Première Communion. Histoire et Discipline, Textes et Documents, des origines au XXe siècle, 1911.pdf
[edit]This French book is not PD in France because the author died in 1966. The 70-year rule applies. For biodata of the author, see his entry on the National Library of France website: catalogue.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb10542502d. Мишоко (talk) 04:39, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --VIGNERON (talk) 12:57, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Not {{PD-textlogo}} {{PD-shape}} because the shape of the airpline surpass COM:TOO. Taichi (talk) 20:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
- It is the logo of a Guatemalan political party that does not exist today. In addition, according to Guatemalan law, the reproduction of this type of logo does not constitute a violation of copyright. Moratoe (talk) 20:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Moratoe: : The PD generic templates aren't fit to Guatemalan laws, there's a {{PD-Guatemala}} template but doesn't have the point about your argumentation. Please provide the number of the specific law and its article. Taichi (talk) 21:06, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, but there is this {{PD-Guatemala-exempt}}, in article 13 paragraph "g" of law 33-98 it does specify what I am telling you Moratoe (talk) 21:31, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- A template created by you called "exempt"? This is a joke? Sorry, but is very suspicious to believe. Taichi (talk) 21:35, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- See question pending on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Logo partido unión democrática (1993-2018).png. —holly {chat} 17:49, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Moratoe: : The PD generic templates aren't fit to Guatemalan laws, there's a {{PD-Guatemala}} template but doesn't have the point about your argumentation. Please provide the number of the specific law and its article. Taichi (talk) 21:06, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Kept: The law does indeed state that "emblems of international governmental or nongovernmental organizations, or of any other organization officially recognized" are not subject to copyright protection. —holly {chat} 15:55, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Not {{PD-textlogo}} {{PD-shape}} because the shape of the bird surpass the COM:TOO. Taichi (talk) 20:25, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- I drew the logo from another logo of a Guatemalan political party that does not exist today. In addition, according to Guatemalan law, the reproduction of this type of logo does not constitute a violation of copyright. Moratoe (talk) 20:41, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Moratoe: : The PD generic templates aren't fit to Guatemalan laws, there's a {{PD-Guatemala}} template but doesn't have the point about your argumentation. Please provide the number of the specific law and its article. Taichi (talk) 21:07, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, but there is this {{PD-Guatemala-exempt}}, in article 13 paragraph "g" of law 33-98 it does specify what I am telling you Moratoe (talk) 21:36, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- That template you created, isn't a official PD template. Sorry, but I don't believe your template. Taichi (talk) 21:48, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Taichi ok, read the law that is official. Bye Moratoe (talk) 22:04, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Moratoe: Article 13 says, "El derecho a publicar correspondencia privada corresponde a su autor, quien para hacerlo necesita consentimiento expreso del destinatario, salvo que la publicación no afecte el honor o el interés de este último. El destinatario puede hacer uso de las cartas o correspondencia recibida en defensa de su persona o de sus intereses." In fact, I can't seem to find the list of exempt items in [2]. Could you help me out here? —holly {chat} 17:27, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hi @Howcheng you're ok. Really the list of exempt items are including in article 13 of the regulations of the law (233-2003), that it's an Governmental Agreement complementary of the Law 33-98. You can find it in [3] on page 39. I you could review all of the template I grateful. Moratoe (talk) 21:29, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Moratoe: Article 13 says, "El derecho a publicar correspondencia privada corresponde a su autor, quien para hacerlo necesita consentimiento expreso del destinatario, salvo que la publicación no afecte el honor o el interés de este último. El destinatario puede hacer uso de las cartas o correspondencia recibida en defensa de su persona o de sus intereses." In fact, I can't seem to find the list of exempt items in [2]. Could you help me out here? —holly {chat} 17:27, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Taichi ok, read the law that is official. Bye Moratoe (talk) 22:04, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- That template you created, isn't a official PD template. Sorry, but I don't believe your template. Taichi (talk) 21:48, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, but there is this {{PD-Guatemala-exempt}}, in article 13 paragraph "g" of law 33-98 it does specify what I am telling you Moratoe (talk) 21:36, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Moratoe: : The PD generic templates aren't fit to Guatemalan laws, there's a {{PD-Guatemala}} template but doesn't have the point about your argumentation. Please provide the number of the specific law and its article. Taichi (talk) 21:07, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Kept: The law does indeed state that "emblems of international governmental or nongovernmental organizations, or of any other organization officially recognized" are not subject to copyright protection. —holly {chat} 15:54, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
pt: Vide Commons:Deletion requests/File:André Ceciliano Presidente da Alerj.png e dezenas de outros semelhantes: segundo o levantamento do status de direitos autorais de imagens publicadas por governos e assembleias legislativas estaduais do Brasil, imagens publicadas pela ALERJ (Assembleia Legislativa do Rio de Janeiro), como esta, não podem ser incluídas no Commons porque não são disponibilizadas sob uma licença livre. // en: according to the survey on the copyright status of images published by state governments and legislative assemblies of Brazil, images published by ALERJ (Rio de Janeiro legislative assembly), like this one, cannot be included in Commons due to not being disponibilized under a free license. Solon 26.125 01:42, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 19:00, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
Zmiana adresu siedziby firmy. Nieaktualne zdjęcie siedziby firmy. Maja B-K (talk) 07:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Kept: This is not a valid reason for deletion. We can keep using for historical purposes. —holly {chat} 19:00, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
unlikely to be own work, user is already known for copyright infrigement Lukas Beck (talk) 07:56, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- This is a lie. These the first photos I've ever uploaded to Wikipedia, and Lukas Beck has reported every one of them. The people who appear in all of these photos are colleagues and friends who on the rights to the photos and have given their permission for their use. I have no idea who Beck is but he is fraudulently reporting me for reasons I can't begin to comprehend. Keoladonaghy (talk) 08:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- In this case, this is a Nashville artist who owns the rights to this photo and gave me explicit permission to use it as I see fit. I can provide his contact information if necessary. Keoladonaghy (talk) 08:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- I have provided comments on all of the other photos he has flagged for deletion. Keoladonaghy (talk) 08:24, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- And if you look on the page where this appears, you will see he is a member of this group, as are everyone else whose photos appear on it!
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:A%E2%80%98ea%E2%80%98e_(group) Keoladonaghy (talk) 08:35, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- I have provided comments on all of the other photos he has flagged for deletion. Keoladonaghy (talk) 08:24, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- In this case, this is a Nashville artist who owns the rights to this photo and gave me explicit permission to use it as I see fit. I can provide his contact information if necessary. Keoladonaghy (talk) 08:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; @Keoladonaghy: The EXIF (photo metadata) stated that it was copyrighted to someone named Neil Schloner. Unless that's you, you don't have the authority to release it under a free license; only Neil Schloner can do that. If you happen to know this person, please have him contact us (see COM:VRT) to authorize the licensing and then we can undelete it. Thanks!. —holly {chat} 18:58, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
trompé de fichier, merci de supprimer T Flavio38 (talk) 09:37, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 18:49, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Yagizresmi as Speedy (sil) and the most recent rationale was: Sayfada eksikler var deneme yapılmış.
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as rationale is not clear. -- Túrelio (talk) 10:06, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Same with: File:Gülben Ergen (cropped).jpeg
.jpeg){kind=link}
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —holly {chat} 18:38, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
poor quality - many similar images. no benefit to community Wkipede (talk) 18:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep we don’t have that many videos of male urination. Dronebogus (talk) 12:09, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —holly {chat} 18:38, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
Shogun ! 186.173.124.58 09:44, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Shotgun, not Shogun, and COM:INUSE. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:00, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete I'm thinking this is a hoax. This image is used on pl:wikiquote:Pacyfikacja wsi Szarajówka, which is about a massacre that took place in 1943, and the caption on the image claims that the person depicted in this photo was involved in the incident. This is obviously a modern photo, and the person here is far too young to have been there. Keeping this photo with this caption without any evidence may possibly open us to a defamation lawsuit (a la the en:Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident). —holly {chat} 18:48, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as per holly. --Yann (talk) 17:57, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
gameinformer is the only place where the logo is seen and they almost definitely just made it up 2A02:C7C:E0DF:2D00:E291:875:8396:F97 18:35, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- I had forgotten that I uploaded this 13 years ago, but I'm unconvinced that it's made up by GI - based on how GI had a lot of exclusive Portal 2 stories back when it was in development and published other pieces of production art. It does not seem unbelievable to me that Valve would have also given them this logo for use in their features, especially given that we do see various other logo variants in the cover art concepts that have been released for the game.--Alexandra IDV (talk) 21:02, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- this logo was made during core hub times and it's seen in one of environment sketches, yall r just deleting beta stuff atp lmao
- https://valvearchive.com/archive/Portal/Portal%202/Art/Environment%20Art/environment_sketches.jpg 85.28.211.0 02:15, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Kept: In Use, and per evidence of the IP user. --Abzeronow (talk) 17:18, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
is it a violation of copyright? Chidgk1 (talk) 08:14, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- Seems like {{PD-ineligible}} to me. The only possibly copyrightable bits are the color choices. —holly {chat} 18:53, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:23, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
