Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2023/04/03
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
_-_vyschiï_sort_Yantar'.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![147 File:Станислав "SlarD" Калугин.jpg](#File:Станислав_"SlarD"_Калугин.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![174 File:Celebrity Wardrobe Stylist Pilar Scratch attends "Hard To Earn" Podcast Celebrating Mase with Avery Artistry and Chef Lexis Gonzales of The Food Networks "Chopped Sweets".jpg](#File:Celebrity_Wardrobe_Stylist_Pilar_Scratch_attends_"Hard_To_Earn"_Podcast_Celebrating_Mase_with_Avery_Artistry_and_Chef_Lexis_Gonzales_of_The_Food_Networks_"Chopped_Sweets".jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![232 File:"Paris, -25m" (1991) - Jean-Francois Robert.jpg](#File:"Paris,_-25m"_(1991)_-_Jean-Francois_Robert.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
No fair use on Commons CoffeeEngineer (talk) 01:20, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: speedily deleted. --rubin16 (talk) 06:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
_-_vyschi%C3%AF_sort_Yantar%27.svg){kind=link}
_-_vyschi%C3%AF_sort_Yantar%27.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Duplicate of File:Sochi Bus Route 75, st. Navaginskaya (j-d vokzal Sochi) - mikroraïon Loo.svg Angelicadia (talk) 06:47, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: deleted the other one. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
_-_vyschi%C3%AF_sort_Yantar%27.svg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
by the uploader Angelicadia (talk) 01:38, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 10:25, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
COM:Flickr washing, maybe? File was uploaded on March 27 and no longer exists today, on April 3. RodRabelo7 (talk) 05:27, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Comment At least 40 files have this same problem. [1] RodRabelo7 (talk) 05:31, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- BELLES MUSES joined Flickr in 2023 [2] and has been posting images that were first published in the 2000s (all of them deleted there, for some reason…). RodRabelo7 (talk) 05:37, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- This image even has a watermark of a site that claims: All materials on MetArt.com, are copyright © 2023 MetArt.com. RodRabelo7 (talk) 05:39, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 07:29, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Clear copyvio of Getty Images and uploader has copy and pasted the same description. Hamza Ali Shah (talk) 06:06, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, obvious copyvio. --Rosenzweig τ 10:49, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
per Exif the photographer is "Gareth Copley - ECB", via Getty Images Rosenzweig τ 10:39, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Rosenzweig τ 11:01, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Facebook, F10 186.173.79.57 01:08, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:08, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
A qué sirve esta imagen? 186.173.79.57 01:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, personal photo with unsourced DW background, 2021 upload by user with no other contributions. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:11, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Esto si que es own work! 186.173.79.57 01:19, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination COM:CV. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:29, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Screenshot own work 186.173.79.57 01:20, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Screenshot 186.173.79.57 01:21, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination COM:CV. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:32, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by 0okm9ijn0987 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Copyvios from www.thenude.com/cover/femjoy/20794/julia-s-in-mountain-pasture-by-stefan-soell#lg=1&slide=8
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52659237037.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52659237032.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52660178445.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52660223223.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52660223208.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! b.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52659730236.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52660178420.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52660014589.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52660014504.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52660178305.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52659730121.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52659236827.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52659730106.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..! - 52660014439.jpg
- File:BELLE NATURE..!.jpg
Yann (talk) 07:36, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 07:37, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by 0okm9ijn0987 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Flickr washing. See https://www.flickr.com/people/b71photos/ and EXIF: Copyright holder: © Dan Culleton, Usage terms: Restricted, Use Only With Prior Permission.
- File:Nastasia 7277.jpg
- File:Nastasia.jpg
- File:Nastasia 7304.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0273.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0272.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0276.jpg
- File:Nude rear black and white.jpg
- File:Olyvia 2-7887.jpg
- File:Olyvia 2-7893.jpg
- File:Sieste.jpg
- File:J'attend mon amant.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0261.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0267.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0270.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0256.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0230.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0250.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0211.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0208.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0216.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0205.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0196.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0188.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0149.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0171.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0164.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0144.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0147.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0132.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0130.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0129.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0120.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0118.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0110.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0104.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0091.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0090.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0089.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0087.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0085.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0086.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0080.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0079.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0078.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0052.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0072.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0075.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0074.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0069.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0067.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0061.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0060.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0048.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0042.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0043.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0040.jpg
- File:Olyvia 0031.jpg
- File:Asian breasts.jpg
- File:Naked asian woman.jpg
- File:Asian nude.jpg
- File:Asian nude 2.jpg
- File:Nude on stool.jpg
- File:Adrienne 9980.jpg
- File:BellaaRose 5058.jpg
- File:BailaRose 5027.jpg
- File:BailaRose 4917.jpg
Yann (talk) 07:56, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:10, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by 0okm9ijn0987 (talk · contribs)
[edit]See above. EXIF: Author: Photographer: Dan Culleton, Copyright holder; Copyright: Dan Culleton, All Rights Reserved.
- File:Mehru 209 - Version 2.jpg
- File:Mehru 139.jpg
- File:MG 5601 - Version 2.jpg
- File:Mehru2 522.jpg
- File:MG 5431 naked with beads.jpg
- File:Naked woman with beads.jpg
- File:Mehru2 66 - Version 2.jpg
- File:Mehru2 383 - Version 2.jpg
- File:Nastasia 7065.jpg
- File:Nastasia 7025.jpg
- File:Nastasia 7051.jpg
- File:Nastasia 7074.jpg
- File:Nastasia 7071.jpg
- File:Nastasia 7090.jpg
- File:Nastasia 7181.jpg
- File:Nastasia 7133.jpg
- File:Nastasia 7160.jpg
- File:Super hot sexy grandma naked.jpg
- File:Nastasia 7207.jpg
Yann (talk) 08:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:10, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by 0okm9ijn0987 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Flickr washing. Deleted from Flickr.
- File:LA NATURE SUBLIME LA FEMME ! - 52678296125.jpg
- File:LA NATURE SUBLIME LA FEMME ! - 52678357183.jpg
- File:LA NATURE SUBLIME LA FEMME ! - 52678357178.jpg
- File:LA NATURE SUBLIME LA FEMME ! - 52678296090.jpg
- File:LA NATURE SUBLIME LA FEMME ! - 52677859871.jpg
- File:LA NATURE SUBLIME LA FEMME !.jpg
- File:Belles Muses - 52649693128.jpg
- File:Belles Muses - 52649693158.jpg
- File:Belles Muses - 52649210336.jpg
Yann (talk) 08:06, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 08:11, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by 0okm9ijn0987 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Probable Flickr washing. See above.
- File:Beach buttocks.jpg
- File:HE BW3.jpg
- File:LA NATURE SUBLIME LA FEMME ! - 52678146884.jpg
- File:Mila Amour Reign Supreme b.jpg
- File:Mila Amour Reign Supreme - 52771437934.jpg
- File:SENSUAL LESBIANS..!.jpg
- File:SENSUAL LESBIANS..! - 52659670134.jpg
- File:Acoustic guitar with woman.jpg
- File:Naked female buttocks.jpg
- File:Belles Muses - 52649693423.jpg
- File:PANTYHOSE & HIGH HEELS - 52691408457.png
- File:PANTYHOSE & HIGH HEELS - 52692416988.jpg
- File:BELLES LINGERIES !.jpg
- File:Mila Amour Reign Supreme - 52770648462.jpg
- File:Mila Amour Reign Supreme - 52771595575.jpg
- File:Vicki 2.jpg
- File:PANTYHOSE & HIGH HEELS.jpg
- File:Mila Amour Reign Supreme.jpg
- File:Naked on bridge.jpg
- File:Belles Muses - 52649479649.jpg
- File:Model with bracelet on floor.jpg
- File:Left breast exposed.jpg
- File:Topless model with blanket.jpg
- File:Naked woman with breasts exposed.jpg
- File:Female violinist.jpg
- File:Nude on side.jpg
- File:Full frontal.jpg
- File:Topless female.jpg
- File:Breasts.jpg
- File:Artistic nude.jpg
- File:Nude woman on side.jpg
- File:Topless woman.jpg
Yann (talk) 08:12, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 13:56, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Commons:Nudity#New uploads of penis photo, not special enough to be educationally useful A1Cafel (talk) 03:52, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:55, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Commons:Nudity#New uploads of penis photo, not special enough to be educationally useful A1Cafel (talk) 03:52, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:55, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Horrible quality glans penis photo, with almost no educational value A1Cafel (talk) 03:54, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Speedy delete, literally useless. I’ve never seen something more useless on Commons. RodRabelo7 (talk) 05:02, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:54, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Watermark Amazon prime video, unlikely to be uploader's work A1Cafel (talk) 16:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:38, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Watermark Getty Images, obviously not uploader's work A1Cafel (talk) 16:20, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:37, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
COM:SS of non-free content A1Cafel (talk) 16:20, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, clear case. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:38, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
File:Celebrity Wardrobe Stylist Pilar Scratch Makes Television Appearance on E! WAGS during New York Fashion Week.jpg
[edit]
COM:SS of non-free content A1Cafel (talk) 16:21, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, clear case. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:34, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
{{Duplicate|230403 1700 day2fireotlk print.png}} Undescribed (talk) 20:37, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, duplicate-processed. --Túrelio (talk) 10:25, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Because it is Nonsense Lavi.98 (talk) 01:01, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Nnsense request by another Android app user who could not resist. --Achim55 (talk) 12:39, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Outside of COM:SCOPE. As a screenshot of Google Scholar, there may be copyright issues here as well. Marbletan (talk) 15:05, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 18:16, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
це недоречне селфі, тому його ДІЙСНО слід ВИДАЛИТИ. КОЛИ-небудь. ЗА ВСЕ СВОЄ ЖИТТЯ З ТОГО, КОЛИ БУЛО ЗАВАНТАЖЕННЯ ЗА ВСЕ СВОЄ ЖИТТЯ. BoulevardBowl27 (talk) 11:04, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Yann. --Rosenzweig τ 00:26, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Ad featuring Indonesian food and drink BoulevardBowl27 (talk) 11:08, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Wutsje. --Rosenzweig τ 00:26, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Even more worse: another ad featuring Indonesian food and drink BoulevardBowl27 (talk) 11:10, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Wutsje. --Rosenzweig τ 00:26, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Taken in Vietnam BoulevardBowl27 (talk) 11:12, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Why would that be a reason for deletion? Wutsje 13:38, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- oh sorry --BoulevardBowl27 (talk) 12:47, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Yann. --Rosenzweig τ 00:26, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
COM:DW of a copyrighted ticket A1Cafel (talk) 15:56, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: already deleted by Taivo. --Rosenzweig τ 00:25, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for 2D works in Japan A1Cafel (talk) 15:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: already deleted by Taivo. --Rosenzweig τ 00:25, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for 2D works in Japan A1Cafel (talk) 15:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: already deleted by Taivo. --Rosenzweig τ 00:25, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP for 2D works in Japan A1Cafel (talk) 16:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: already deleted by Taivo. --Rosenzweig τ 00:25, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Who is the author? This picture doesn't look like a selfie. Established 1620 (talk) 15:45, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Lean
Keep In use in multiple projects, on Commons since 2015 without earlier challenges. Reverse image searches shows multiple other versions online, but none found with contradicting attribution claims. Re: "doesn't look like a selfie" - timers on cameras are common and easy to use. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Infrogmation! --
- I am a newbie to Wikipedia, and very puzzled by this request from "Established 1620" to delete the photo of me. My wife took this picture!
- Is there something I should do?
- (Concurrently, I have asked for the deletion of the photo with the Italizn fellow. Is there more I should do about this? (It is a terrible photo, and I don't recognize the fellow.)
- Thanks, Ron Rivest Ronald L. Rivest (talk) 03:54, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- Don't be offended. We regularly double check each other to make sure copyright violations are avoided. (A bit unusual to only do so 8 years after a photo is uploaded however.) -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:42, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- This is Ron Rivest. This picture was taken by my wife, who is an excellent photographer! She provides all necessary copyright permissions for the use of this picture, of course. 108.20.19.15 13:57, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per above. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:40, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Facebook of Polski rapper 186.173.79.57 17:47, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- DaNON DANIEL NITECKI Hejhojlo (talk) 13:41, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted, I blocked Daniel indefinitely for sockpuppetry and Hejhojlo also indefinitely as sockpuppet and will delete all uploads of both as out of project scope, self-promotion and/or copyright violations. Taivo (talk) 07:22, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
it's a hoax that was made for the purpose of vandalizing Wikipedia, It is known that a picture at this such quality did not exist during the 19th Century, nor have T-Shirts or Adidas Tracksuits exist during that time. The image is clearly photoshopped and is an entire hoax. Wesoree (talk) 18:51, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Yann. --Rosenzweig τ 11:33, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
I did not find evidence of permission at web page cited as source. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:08, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Masur (talk) 06:49, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation. Image taken from https://spapps.environment.sa.gov.au/SeedsOfSA/speciesinformation.html?rid=3542 (Display more images) Gderrin (talk) 00:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete I do not see the claimed license at the source site. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 14:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Album cover CoffeeEngineer (talk) 00:29, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Very necessary? 186.173.79.57 01:06, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete I have no idea, but he seems to be presenting this as a selfie, and it sure doesn't appear to be one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:43, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Timers on cameras are common and easy to use, and someone with good quality photo equipment as seen in photo would likely know how to use them. I still support deletion as out of scope, but that person shown is also the photographer is not implausible. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:05, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Personal photo by user with no other contributions -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:05, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Looks like someone not needed. 186.173.79.57 01:10, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete unused personal photo by non-contributor -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:09, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:50, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Un otro rapero famoso 186.173.79.57 01:12, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete OOS, used on en:w sandbox article declined in December -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:27, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:50, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Video game cover CoffeeEngineer (talk) 01:29, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- There is no reason to delete this original work. 78.161.52.27 18:33, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Please read my sentence. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 18:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: advertisment. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:50, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
duplicate of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NZ_Brewers_Association_and_US_Embassy_event,_19_November_2019_2.jpg (unsure why the upload tool didn't pick up on that) Schwede66 02:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Image still copyrighted in USA due to COM:URAA A1Cafel (talk) 05:24, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:52, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Image still copyrighted in USA due to COM:URAA A1Cafel (talk) 05:24, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:52, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Image still copyrighted in USA due to COM:URAA A1Cafel (talk) 05:24, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:52, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Image still copyrighted in USA due to COM:URAA A1Cafel (talk) 05:25, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:52, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Image still copyrighted in USA due to COM:URAA A1Cafel (talk) 05:31, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:56, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Nasirmazumder (talk) 19:11, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Speedy; G7. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:06, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of project scope. — Haseeb (talk) 06:19, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:56, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploaded as 'own work', but this is a commercial logo which the uploader claims to have no connection with. DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; over TOO, used only in declined en:w sandbox article. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:02, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
No FOP Iran. Derivative works. MehdiTalk 09:15, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
No FOP Iran. Derivative works. MehdiTalk 09:17, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Every other cricket-related upload by this user turned out to be a copyvio. The size of this file suggests it's a copyvio as well. I found it on Twitter here, but actually a day after it was uploaded here, so there must be another source. Rosenzweig τ 10:54, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:14, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
out of com:PS
Hanooz 13:24, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:15, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
out of com:PS Hanooz 13:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:16, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Facebook (F1) 186.173.79.57 14:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:16, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Facebook (F1) 186.173.79.57 14:29, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:16, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Muhammed6169 (talk · contribs)
[edit]- File:Kadirga 1.jpg: original photo uploaded by Trabzon Metropolitan Municipality
- File:Kiraz 1.jpg: original photo uploaded by Trabzon Metropolitan Municipality
- File:Sultanmurat 1.jpg: original photo uploaded by Trabzon Metropolitan Municipality
- File:Ortahisar fatih camii.jpg: original photo uploaded by Trabzon Metropolitan Municipality on the page for mosques on Trabzon
- File:20220810024127TZp21.jpg: Published on Facebook and cited the author as @karadeniz_photo53.
- File:20220810024127ajKsc.jpg: original photo uploaded by Trabzon Metropolitan Municipality on own page
- File:Kaymakli Manastırı.jpg: original photo uploaded by Trabzon Metropolitan Municipality
- File:Vazelon Manastırı.jpg: original photo uploaded by Trabzon Metropolitan Municipality
- File:Sumela3.jpg: original photo uploaded by Trabzon Metropolitan Municipality
- File:Gulbaharhatun.jpg: original photo uploaded by Trabzon Metropolitan Municipality
- File:Cal-magarasi-a.jpg: original photo uploaded by Trabzon Metropolitan Municipality
- File:İskenderpaşa Camii.jpg: original photo uploaded by Trabzon Metropolitan Municipality
- File:20220824100532KJlO9.jpg: Published by Trabzon Metropolitan Municipality on 9 October 2021 [3]
- File:Eastern-black-sea-2377690 960 720.jpg: probably this photo because have same pixel, also tihs phto available on stock photo websites but no exact author information.
So these probably copyrihted photos will be deleted. Uncitoyen (talk) 16:07, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy delete the Trabzon Metropolitan Municipality images. There is a © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır (all rights reserved) statement in the website's footer. --HyperGaruda (talk) 17:44, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:18, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Montenegro presidental elections 2nd round.svg Ђидо (talk) 16:27, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:16, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
COM:SCOPE Ameisenigel (talk) 19:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Personal file outside of COM:SCOPE. Seems to have an inappropriate promotional purpose as well ("We provide benefit auctions services to our clients"). Marbletan (talk) 19:45, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
COM:SCOPE Ameisenigel (talk) 19:20, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Doublon File:Frans Hogenberg 003.jpg 81.250.133.194 09:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
doublon Frans Hogenberg 003.jpg Remy34 (talk) 09:29, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:38, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Complex logos can be in Commons only with VRT-permission. Taivo (talk) 09:37, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 09:42, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
The green plumbob to the left might possibly be above threshold of originality in the US Trade (talk) 11:47, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Seems too detailed to me. –IagoQnsi (talk) 13:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:22, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Copyvio. This seems to be a picture of a tv screen. Denniscabrams (talk) 12:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Newspaper front page, copyright not likely owned by uploader discospinster (talk) 13:17, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:40, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Newspaper page, copyright not likely owned by uploader discospinster (talk) 13:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:40, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
COM:DW of Cuban banknotes. Cuba has no entry at COM:CUR but, per COM:CUBA, government works have perpetual copyright.
- File:Cuba1000b.jpg
- File:Cuba500-19b.jpg
- File:Cuba1000a.jpg
- File:Cuba500-19a.jpg
- File:Cuba100b.jpg
- File:Cuba200a.jpg
- File:Cuba200b.jpg
- File:Cuba100a.jpg
- File:Cuba50b.jpg
- File:Cuba50a.jpg
- File:Cuba10b.jpg
- File:Cuba20b.jpg
- File:Cuba20a.jpg
- File:Cuba5b.jpg
- File:Cuba5a.jpg
- File:Cuba10a.jpg
- File:Cuba 1995 1 p112 b.jpg
- File:Banco-Nacional-Cuba-1961-1-Peso-d280321-b.jpg
- File:Kub-100-Pesos-Conv-R-1994.jpg
- File:Kub-100-Pesos-Conv-V-1994.jpg
- File:Kub-20-Pesos-Conv-R-1994.jpg
- File:Kub-50-Pesos-Conv-V-1994.jpg
- File:Kub-50-Pesos-Conv-R-1994.jpg
- File:Kub-10-Pesos-Conv-V-1994.jpg
- File:Kub-20-Pesos-Conv-V-1994.jpg
- File:Kub-10-Pesos-Conv-R-1994.jpg
- File:Kub-5-Pesos-Conv-V-1994.jpg
- File:Kub-5-Pesos-Conv-R-1994-L.jpg
- File:Kub-1-Peso-Conv-R-1994.jpg
- File:Kub-1-Peso-Conv-V-1994.jpg
- File:Cuba 1978 20 M181217 f.jpg
- File:Cuba 1978 20 M181217 b.jpg
- File:Cuba 1983 10 M181217 b.jpg
- File:Cuba 1984 5 d241220 f.jpg
- File:Cuba 1984 5 d241220 b.jpg
- File:Cuba 1983 10 M181217 f.jpg
- File:Moneda-cuba-pesos-cubanos.jpg
Эlcobbola talk 15:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:19, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
COM:DW of Chinese banknotes, which are not free per COM:CUR China. China is pma+50; none are old enough for this presumption. Evidence needed.
- File:Chipa pr 1965 10 879b b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1965 10 879b f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1960 5 876b b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1960 5 876b f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1960 2 875 b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1960 2 875 f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1960 1 874a b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1960 1 874a f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1972 5j 880a b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1972 5j 880a f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1962 2j 878b b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1960 1j 873 d131016 b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1960 1j 873 d131016 f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1962 2j 878b f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 2 867 f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 10 870 b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 10 870 f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 5 869 b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 5 869 f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 3 868 b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 3 868 f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 2 867 b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 1 866 b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 1 866 f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 5f 862a b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 5j 865 b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 5j 865 f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 2j 864 b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 2j 864 f.jpg
- File:BDS2 chipa pr 1953 1j 863 d150917 b.jpg
- File:BDS2 chipa pr 1953 1j 863 d150917 f.jpg
- File:Zhongguo-Renmin-Yinhang-1953-2F-D211020-b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1953 5f 862a f.jpg
- File:Zhongguo-Renmin-Yinhang-1953-2F-D211020-f.jpg
- File:Zhongguo-Renmin-Yinhang-1953-1F-D211020-f.jpg
- File:Zhongguo-Renmin-Yinhang-1953-1F-D211020-b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1949 5000 851 d150817 b.jpg
- File:0-chipa pr 1949 50000 855 d271119 b.jpg
- File:0-chipa pr 1949 50000 855 d271119 f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1949 10000 854 f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1949 10000 854 b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1949 5000 851 d150817 f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1949 1000 849 b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1949 1000 849 f.jpg
- File:CHINA P 500 1949 D291119 b.jpg
- File:CHINA P 500 1949 D291119 f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1949 200 839 b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1949 200 839 f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1949 100 834-D310319-b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1949 100 834-D310319-f.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1949 50 830 6 b.jpg
- File:Chipa pr 1949 50 830 6 f.jpg
- File:CHINA P 20 1949 D110320 b.jpg
- File:CHINA P 20 1949 D110320 f.jpg
- File:BDS3-chipa pr 1949 10 852-D310319-b.jpg
- File:Bds0-chipa pr 1949 5 813-d280918 f.jpg
- File:Bds0-chipa pr 1949 5 813-d280918 b.jpg
- File:BDS3-chipa pr 1949 10 852-D310319-f.jpg
- File:1uan1949.jpg
- File:100uan19992.jpg
- File:100uan19991.jpg
- File:50uan19992.jpg
- File:20uan19992.jpg
- File:50uan19991.jpg
- File:20uan19991.jpg
- File:10uan19992.jpg
- File:5uan19992.jpg
- File:10uan19991.jpg
- File:1uan19992.jpg
- File:1uan19991.jpg
- File:5uan19991.jpg
- File:50uan19801.jpg
- File:50uan19802.jpg
- File:10uan19802.jpg
- File:5uan19801.jpg
- File:5uan19802.jpg
- File:10uan19801.jpg
- File:100uan19801.jpg
- File:100uan19802.jpg
- File:1uan19962.jpg
- File:2uan19962.jpg
- File:2uan19961.jpg
- File:1uan19901.png
- File:1uan19902.png
- File:1uan19961.jpg
Эlcobbola talk 15:34, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:18, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
small files with low resolution. can be founded on some Thai websites via Google image search. ([4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], etc)
- File:000WQ449A17035A0F3A482j.jpg
- File:20171122441954d29ad2a375cef8ea524a2c7e73132928 ဖ.jpg
- File:Images (3)ဖ.jpg
- File:HCtHFA7ele6Q2dULVcMRWaMtpQlDzjEFwMPbsbOGQ2m4wpT5o68mQZiKeCyAXc8lmx.jpg
- File:Images (4)သဇိုၚ်.jpg
- File:ทำไมต้องพอเพียง.jpg
- File:2019-08-01-21 31 17-ถ้าคุณเป็นคนหนึ่ง-ที่กำลังอยากใช้ชีวิตพอเพียง.png
- File:နဲကဲတဵုလွဳပရာ.jpg
- File:ပရေၚ်တဵုလွဳ.jpg
- File:ပရေၚ်လွဳဂတာပ်အခေတ်.jpg
- File:ပရေၚ်တဵုဂတာပ်အခေတ်.jpg
- File:ပရေၚ်တဵုလွဳဂတာပ်အခေတ်.jpg
- File:Drying krill နဲကဲစဲကောန်ၚာကၠာဟွံဂွံဒှ်ခရံက်.jpg
- File:1413143276-image-o.jpg
- File:Images (2)ခရံက်.jpg
- File:Unnamed (1) ခၞက်ခရံက်ကၠာဟွံဂွံလုပ်ဟရဳဏီ.jpg
- File:711388-01 နဲကဲစဲကောန်ၚာကြပ်ဒှ်ခရံက်.jpg
- File:Images (2) နဲကဲစဲကောန်ၚာကၠာဟွံဂွံဒှ်ခရံက်.jpg
- File:Images (3) ကောန်ၚာကၠာဟွံဂွံဒှ်ခရံက်.jpg
- File:11-13 ကောန်ၚာကၠောန်ခရံက်.jpg
- File:000WQ23CCB66CAAE171861j ရုဲကောန်ၚာကျေဝ်ကျေဝ်သွက်သ္ဂောံကၠောန်ခရံက်(ဟရံက်).jpg
%E1%80%96.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
%E1%80%9E%E1%80%87%E1%80%AD%E1%80%AF%E1%81%9A%E1%80%BA.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
%E1%80%81%E1%80%9B%E1%80%B6%E1%80%80%E1%80%BA.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_%E1%80%81%E1%81%9E%E1%80%80%E1%80%BA%E1%80%81%E1%80%9B%E1%80%B6%E1%80%80%E1%80%BA%E1%80%80%E1%81%A0%E1%80%AC%E1%80%9F%E1%80%BD%E1%80%B6%E1%80%82%E1%80%BD%E1%80%B6%E1%80%9C%E1%80%AF%E1%80%95%E1%80%BA%E1%80%9F%E1%80%9B%E1%80%B3%E1%80%8F%E1%80%AE.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_%E1%80%94%E1%80%B2%E1%80%80%E1%80%B2%E1%80%85%E1%80%B2%E1%80%80%E1%80%B1%E1%80%AC%E1%80%94%E1%80%BA%E1%81%9A%E1%80%AC%E1%80%80%E1%81%A0%E1%80%AC%E1%80%9F%E1%80%BD%E1%80%B6%E1%80%82%E1%80%BD%E1%80%B6%E1%80%92%E1%80%BE%E1%80%BA%E1%80%81%E1%80%9B%E1%80%B6%E1%80%80%E1%80%BA.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_%E1%80%80%E1%80%B1%E1%80%AC%E1%80%94%E1%80%BA%E1%81%9A%E1%80%AC%E1%80%80%E1%81%A0%E1%80%AC%E1%80%9F%E1%80%BD%E1%80%B6%E1%80%82%E1%80%BD%E1%80%B6%E1%80%92%E1%80%BE%E1%80%BA%E1%80%81%E1%80%9B%E1%80%B6%E1%80%80%E1%80%BA.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 14:47, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:21, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
small files with low resolution. can be founded on some Thai websites via Google image search. ([10], [11])
_%E1%80%85%E1%80%B2%E1%80%90%E1%80%AF%E1%80%B2%E1%80%90%E1%80%BE%E1%80%BA%E1%80%B1%E1%80%81%E1%81%9E%E1%80%80%E1%80%BA%E1%80%9C%E1%81%9F%E1%80%B1%E1%81%9A%E1%80%BA%E1%80%99%E1%80%BD%E1%80%B2%E1%80%8A%E1%80%AD%E1%81%8A.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 05:20, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:19, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
small file size and resolution, exif display seems to be the original source is google image.
- File:Raikamnanchul06သတ်လဴ.jpg
- File:4-36-1024x683 သတ်လဴ.jpg
- File:1.สวนส้มอองตอง-ผลผลิตส้มจำนวนมากจากต้มแม่พันธุ์คุณภาพ-696x392 သတ်လိမဴ.jpg
- File:15 သတ်လိမဴ.jpg
- File:ส้มเป็นผลไม้ยอดนิยมของคนไทย သတ်လိမဴ.jpg
- File:ส้มโอ သတ်လဴ.jpg
- File:6e ပၞဴတဵုစုတ်ကဵုန.jpg
- File:3 တၞံပၞဴ.jpg
- File:20170930 015830 ပၞဴ.jpg
Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 13:14, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 12:21, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small size, missing EXIF
- File:မန်လရိုအ်ယာံ.png
- File:တၞံသတ်လၚ်္ကာ.jpg
- File:တၞံသတ်ကြုက်.jpg
- File:သတ်ကြုက်.jpg
- File:သတ်ပၞဴ.jpg
- File:ပၞဴ.jpg
Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 09:26, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Kept: part of a series, clearly taken at the same time by same photographer, not found elsewhere using Google Images, undue suspicion. Delete one screengrab. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:24, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
screenshots of copyrighted software Google Maps/Earth
- File:ပြၚ်ဂြးဗ္တဳ (ပြၚ်ၜဳပါၚ်မ္ၚဵု).png
- File:ပြၚ်ဟလိၚ် (ပြၚ်ဗ္တဳဇမၠိၚ်).png
- File:ပြၚ်ဟလိၚ် (ပြၚ်ၜဳဇမၠိၚ်ရေဝ်သၠုၚ်ကျာ ဂကောံကွာန်ပါၚ်ယၚ်ဒိန်).png
- File:ပြၚ်ဍောတ် (ပြၚ်ဗ္တဳဍောတ် ကွာန်ပါၚ်ယၚ်ဒိန် ရေဝ်သၠုၚ်ကျာ).png
- File:ကျာ်စေတဳလဒေါဝ်သာသနာ ကွာန်ယၚ်ဒိန်.png
- File:ကျာ်စေတဳဒဵုထဝ် (ကွာန်ပါၚ်ယၚ်ဒိန်).png
- File:Tkotklaw.png
- File:ပါၚ်ၜဳ (ဇီးဖြူသောၚ်).png
- File:ကလအ်ကွာန်.png
- File:ကွာန်ကလအ်.png
- File:ကွာန်ကအ်လှိုၚ်.png
- File:ကွာန်တၟိတဴတက်.png
- File:ကွာန်ပါၚ်မ္ၚဵု.png
- File:ကွာန်တၟိၜိုပ်ထဝ်.png
- File:ကွာန်မ္ၚဵုဇၞော်.png
- File:ကွာန်ယၚ်ရေဝ်.png
- File:ကွာန်တၟိယၚ်ဒိန်.png
- File:ကွာန်ယၚ်ဒိန်.png
- File:ကွာန်ပါၚ်ယၚ်ဒိန်.png
- File:တ္ကံဇၞော်.png
- File:တ္ကံ.png
- File:တ္ကံကၠဵု.png
- File:ကျာ်စေတဳကြုၚ်စၠန်.png
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 16:51, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:41, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Avinash, who else? 186.173.79.57 01:10, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:47, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Album cover CoffeeEngineer (talk) 01:21, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:47, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
looks like youtube washing: the channel with low number of subscribers, image uploaded by a blocked user and it looks like the video was taken to the channel from the elsewhere rubin16 (talk) 07:06, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
This statue may be recent and according to COM:FOP Japan there is no FOP for statues. There are more info about the statue in https://akiou.wordpress.com/2016/11/10/takenaka-jinya/ and I was told on jawiki that the page indicates the statue was recent. MGA73 (talk) 08:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
No FOP Iran. Derivative works. MehdiTalk 09:10, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
No FOP Iran. Derivative works. MehdiTalk 09:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
One page of raw text, out of project scope. Achim55 (talk) 11:33, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Likely not own work: visual characteristics suggest screengrab. P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:02, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:47, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Obvious out of scope and also DW/screengrab. P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:47, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Low quality COM:PENIS photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 14:34, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:48, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Low quality COM:PENIS photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 14:38, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:48, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Low quality COM:PENIS photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 14:39, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:48, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Photo of a painting of a subject that died in 1951. The subject looks similar to how he looked in in a 1932 photograph so I'm guessing circa 1930s for painting. Greece is 70 pma and we would need to know who the painter was of this to determine its copyright status. It's possible the artist lived to at least 1953. Abzeronow (talk) 17:23, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:47, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Derivative work of the logo of Dragon Force, a Sega Saturn game. See https://www.deviantart.com/vanesshenron/art/Dragon-Crest-White-81957049 and https://www.giantbomb.com/dragon-force/3025-1695/characters/ , and https://www.ebay.com/itm/294877302910 Abzeronow (talk) 18:12, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:47, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
A small and blurry image with no indication of own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:01, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:48, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
very poor quality GualdimG (talk) 07:23, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, poor quality photo without compensating value; category shows we have multiple good quality photos of same view. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:59, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:43, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by AtelierTexier (talk · contribs)
[edit]Works by Richard Texier, living French artist. VRT permission needed.
- File:Richard Texier - Artiste - Dans son studio.jpg
- File:Richard Texier - Peinture - Chaosmos.jpg
- File:Richard Texier - Sculpture - Elastogenese.jpg
- File:Richard Texier - Pantheo Vortex.jpg
- File:Richard Texier -Sculpture- Unicorna céleste.jpg
- File:Richard Texier -Esprit du temps- Shanghai.jpg
- File:Richard Texier - Sculpture - les outils du navigateur.jpg
- File:Richard Texier-Sculpture-Angel Bear- Paris.png
Ruthven (msg) 10:55, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
His facebook 186.173.79.57 12:19, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 16:11, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 16:12, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Facebook 186.173.79.57 20:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:40, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Not an own work 186.173.79.57 21:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:40, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Meet Patil 186.173.79.57 21:02, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:40, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Studio photo with watermark 186.173.79.57 21:04, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Non relevant person trying to publish his own biography. Stego (talk) 21:36, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
GoogleMaps CopyVio Enyavar (talk) 21:52, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:39, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Adolescent girls of Taiwan
[edit]Out of scope. Not notable person.
- File:A girl in Taiwan 20070311.jpg
- File:NightCat Funny.jpg
- File:Spoken Wikipedia NCTU-001.JPG
- File:可愛的容瑋.jpg
- File:台鐵台中站第三代車站-滑手機的女孩.jpg
- File:清秀可愛美麗的容瑋.jpg
SCP-2000 04:37, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:36, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Blurry and unused personal photo, out of project scope A1Cafel (talk) 16:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:35, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
File:New-edition-45th-anniversary-19782023-signatures-thank-you-for-the-memories-shirt12051.jpg
[edit]
copyright violation (photographs which are not reasoned with the license stated here) Mateus2019 (talk) 17:15, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
personal artwork, not in scope, not used Avron (talk) 17:46, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Creator did not give permission for use, requiested deletion. Christine 18:36, 3 April 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Figureskatingfan (talk • contribs) 18:36, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Creator did not give permission for use, requested deletion. Christine 18:36, 3 April 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Figureskatingfan (talk • contribs) 18:36, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Creator did not give permission for use, requested deletion. Christine 18:37, 3 April 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Figureskatingfan (talk • contribs) 18:37, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Álbum album 186.173.79.57 18:37, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:34, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Creator did not give permission for use, requested deletion. Christine 18:38, 3 April 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Figureskatingfan (talk • contribs) 18:38, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Facebook own work... 186.173.79.57 18:38, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
F10, F1, DW 186.173.79.57 18:39, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Derivative works. --Polarlys (talk) 11:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
When our hero was in the military... 186.173.79.57 18:40, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope. --Polarlys (talk) 11:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Unused personal image 186.173.79.57 18:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Unused, probably unnecessary and invented 186.173.79.57 18:52, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
This file does not belong to the uploader and is from the images available on the Internet CaesarIran (talk) 18:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:32, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Your eye really doesn't interest many, unless you aré a notable person. 186.173.79.57 18:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: image of human eye. --Polarlys (talk) 11:32, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Satrapcommerce (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal files (letter of appointment, certificates, etc.) outside of COM:SCOPE. Only uploaded for use on draft article (w:en:Draft:Alireza Pandkhahi) that has been speedy deleted.
- File:Confirmation of study in lf3.pdf
- File:Invitation for KCH.pdf
- File:Certificate Alireza Pandkhahi.pdf
Marbletan (talk) 20:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:31, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
This image is copyrighted © Burk Uzzle 2018 and is not free for public use. 70.19.55.56 20:33, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 11:31, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
It looks like a random nude photo with little educational value, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 03:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Maybe a photo of the photographer's wife, but either way, I agree with you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:01, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete, and please don't be tolerant with psychopats that expose their wives. 186.173.79.57 19:59, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- What are you talking about? Do you think she had no agency? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:04, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Kadı Message 18:29, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Unused personal photos, out of project scope. — Haseeb (talk) 04:56, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Kadı Message 18:30, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
out of scope? Trade (talk) 11:17, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- COM:INUSE on idwiki, not tagged for deletion currently. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:14, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion: In use. --Kadı Message 18:31, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Hazargezmis (talk · contribs)
[edit]out of project scope, not notable, possible advertising.
----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 20:51, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- also user:Zafer marked them with copyvio. but i started DR before... so, they are also possible copyvios. ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 10:39, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Kadı Message 18:31, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Seems generated from a real comic/novel scene, and may have COM:DW concern A1Cafel (talk) 15:49, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep It's AI generated. Which "real comic / novel" are you claiming instead? Andy Dingley (talk) 00:52, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per Andy Dingley. If a particular comic of which this is a derivative work can be shown, please re-nominate for deletion, but without evidence, I will assume that it is the AI's creation. AI image generators are known to occasionally generate images that are directly based on a particular source picture (particularly if clearly instructed to imitate a particular artist), but this is not very common, so I think there's no grounds for deletion without further evidence. --Gestumblindi (talk) 18:35, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
It looks like a random nude photo with little educational value, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 03:56, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Several absurd pictures you have uploaded do bother others though. Delete this lady, she is not someone in scope. If Rod Rabelo got undressed, would he be in scope? (I hope not.) 186.173.79.57 19:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, no! Not the Chilean IP again!
- Anyway, I just came here to change to delete, as I think the uploader cannot be trusted after the Flickr washing episode. P.S.: IP, please login when replying to me. ;) RodRabelo7 (talk) 21:47, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Several absurd pictures you have uploaded do bother others though. Delete this lady, she is not someone in scope. If Rod Rabelo got undressed, would he be in scope? (I hope not.) 186.173.79.57 19:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, see also c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by 0okm9ijn0987. --Wutsje 00:35, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
found on Twitter, no permission evident: https://mobile.twitter.com/CitizenRobDavis/photo discospinster (talk) 13:14, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10160726858642457&set=a.498122442456
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:30, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Iliya.Gramatikov (talk · contribs)
[edit]Yasen Panov is a living author so VRT permission for their works would likely be needed. Additionally some of these files are derivative works of J.R.R. Tolkien who died in 1973 and whose works are not public domain in the UK or the US.
- File:Panov - Tolikin vol. II - 3 illustration.jpg
- File:Panov - Tolikin vol. II - 2 illustration.jpg
- File:Panov - Tolikin vol. II - 1 cover.jpg
- File:Panov - Tolikin vol. I - 3 - illustration.jpg
- File:Panov - Tolikin vol. I - 2 illustration.jpg
- File:Panov - Tolikin vol. I - 1 cover.jpg
Abzeronow (talk) 16:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hi and thanks for getting in touch!
- Yes, these are illustrations by Yasen Panov for the first Bulgarian edition of Tolkien's book. Now the book is out of print and the publishing house is no longer existing. Before uploading these files I've asked Yasen Panov for permission to upload them in order to use them for an artist's article, dedicated to Yasen Panov. He amiability agreed.
- If needed, I can ask him to confirm his permission via email or any other way.
- Best regards,
- Iliya Iliya.Gramatikov (talk) 17:19, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Having Panov contact COM:VRT would be a good idea. Abzeronow (talk) 17:30, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Ticket:2023040810003548 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 12:00, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 12:49, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploader und Künstler sind nicht identisch, bisher anscheinend keine Freigabeerklärung des Künstlers erfolgt, Uploader ist ein Single Purpose Account der sich nicht meldet trotz Hinweis auf seiner Disk. Auf de.Wikipdia: Benutzer Diskussion:Nikolaus Orbis AxelHH (talk) 22:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo!
- Ich habe mich gemeldet und die Freigabe durch den Künstler, in dessen Auftrag und mit dessen Beteiligung ich den Artikel erststellt habe, wurde eingereicht.
- Nikolaus Orbis Nikolaus Orbis (talk) 08:29, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 11:16, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploader und Künstler sind nicht identisch, bisher anscheinend keine Freigabeerklärung des Künstlers erfolgt, Uploader ist ein Single Purpose Account der sich nicht meldet trotz Hinweis auf seiner Disk. Auf de.Wikipdia: Benutzer Diskussion:Nikolaus Orbis AxelHH (talk) 22:52, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo!
- Ich habe mich gemeldet und die Freigabe durch den Künstler, in dessen Auftrag und mit dessen Beteiligung ich den Artikel erststellt habe, wurde eingereicht.
- Nikolaus Orbis Nikolaus Orbis (talk) 08:29, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 11:16, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploader und Künstler sind nicht identisch, bisher anscheinend keine Freigabeerklärung des Künstlers erfolgt, Uploader ist ein Single Purpose Account der sich nicht meldet trotz Hinweis auf seiner Disk. Auf de.Wikipdia: Benutzer Diskussion:Nikolaus Orbis AxelHH (talk) 22:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo!
- Ich habe mich gemeldet und die Freigabe durch den Künstler, in dessen Auftrag und mit dessen Beteiligung ich den Artikel erststellt habe, wurde eingereicht.
- Nikolaus Orbis Nikolaus Orbis (talk) 08:30, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 11:16, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploader und Künstler sind nicht identisch, bisher anscheinend keine Freigabeerklärung des Künstlers erfolgt, Uploader ist ein Single Purpose Account der sich nicht meldet trotz Hinweis auf seiner Disk. Auf de.Wikipdia: Benutzer Diskussion:Nikolaus Orbis AxelHH (talk) 22:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 11:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploader und Künstler sind nicht identisch, bisher anscheinend keine Freigabeerklärung des Künstlers erfolgt, Uploader ist ein Single Purpose Account der sich nicht meldet trotz Hinweis auf seiner Disk. Auf de.Wikipdia: Benutzer Diskussion:Nikolaus Orbis AxelHH (talk) 22:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo!
- Ich habe mich gemeldet und die Freigabe durch den Künstler, in dessen Auftrag und mit dessen Beteiligung ich den Artikel erststellt habe, wurde eingereicht.
- Nikolaus Orbis Nikolaus Orbis (talk) 08:30, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 11:18, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploader und Künstler sind nicht identisch, bisher anscheinend keine Freigabeerklärung des Künstlers erfolgt, Uploader ist ein Single Purpose Account der sich nicht meldet trotz Hinweis auf seiner Disk. Auf de.Wikipdia: Benutzer Diskussion:Nikolaus Orbis AxelHH (talk) 22:54, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo!
- Ich habe mich gemeldet und die Freigabe durch den Künstler, in dessen Auftrag und mit dessen Beteiligung ich den Artikel erststellt habe, wurde eingereicht.
- Nikolaus Orbis Nikolaus Orbis (talk) 08:31, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 11:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- Also the derivative File:Kidwelly castle aerial view no borders.jpg
Uploader attributes this image to https://www.flickr.com/photos/192165503@N07/50995792353/ which appear to be a reproduction of a (1960s/70s) postcard. The same image is used on other copyrighted pages, for example https://swanseabaynews.com/2022/03/25/hop-back-into-the-history-of-south-wales-this-easter/ - at best the uploader needs to give the correct copyright info, because the images they are uploading are patently not their own Sionk (talk) 22:55, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:30, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploader und Künstler sind nicht identisch, bisher anscheinend keine Freigabeerklärung des Künstlers erfolgt, Uploader ist ein Single Purpose Account der sich nicht meldet trotz Hinweis auf seiner Disk. Auf de.Wikipdia: Benutzer Diskussion:Nikolaus Orbis AxelHH (talk) 22:55, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo!
- Ich habe mich gemeldet und die Freigabe durch den Künstler, in dessen Auftrag und mit dessen Beteiligung ich den Artikel erststellt habe, wurde eingereicht.
- Nikolaus Orbis Nikolaus Orbis (talk) 08:31, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 11:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploader und Künstler sind nicht identisch, bisher anscheinend keine Freigabeerklärung des Künstlers erfolgt, Uploader ist ein Single Purpose Account der sich nicht meldet trotz Hinweis auf seiner Disk. Auf de.Wikipdia: Benutzer Diskussion:Nikolaus Orbis AxelHH (talk) 22:55, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo!
- Ich habe mich gemeldet und die Freigabe durch den Künstler, in dessen Auftrag und mit dessen Beteiligung ich den Artikel erststellt habe, wurde eingereicht.
- Nikolaus Orbis Nikolaus Orbis (talk) 08:31, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 11:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploader und Künstler sind nicht identisch, bisher anscheinend keine Freigabeerklärung des Künstlers erfolgt, Uploader ist ein Single Purpose Account der sich nicht meldet trotz Hinweis auf seiner Disk. Auf de.Wikipdia: Benutzer Diskussion:Nikolaus Orbis AxelHH (talk) 22:56, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo!
- Ich habe mich gemeldet und die Freigabe durch den Künstler, in dessen Auftrag und mit dessen Beteiligung ich den Artikel erststellt habe, wurde eingereicht.
- Nikolaus Orbis Nikolaus Orbis (talk) 08:31, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 11:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploader und Künstler sind nicht identisch, bisher anscheinend keine Freigabeerklärung des Künstlers erfolgt, Uploader ist ein Single Purpose Account der sich nicht meldet trotz Hinweis auf seiner Disk. Auf de.Wikipdia: Benutzer Diskussion:Nikolaus Orbis AxelHH (talk) 22:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo!
- Ich habe mich gemeldet und die Freigabe durch den Künstler, in dessen Auftrag und mit dessen Beteiligung ich den Artikel erststellt habe, wurde eingereicht.
- Nikolaus Orbis Nikolaus Orbis (talk) 08:32, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 11:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploader und Künstler sind nicht identisch, bisher anscheinend keine Freigabeerklärung des Künstlers erfolgt, Uploader ist ein Single Purpose Account der sich nicht meldet trotz Hinweis auf seiner Disk. Auf de.Wikipdia: Benutzer Diskussion:Nikolaus Orbis AxelHH (talk) 22:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo!
- Ich habe mich gemeldet und die Freigabe durch den Künstler, in dessen Auftrag und mit dessen Beteiligung ich den Artikel erststellt habe, wurde eingereicht.
- Nikolaus Orbis Nikolaus Orbis (talk) 08:32, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 11:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploader und Künstler sind nicht identisch, bisher anscheinend keine Freigabeerklärung des Künstlers erfolgt, Uploader ist ein Single Purpose Account der sich nicht meldet trotz Hinweis auf seiner Disk. Auf de.Wikipdia: Benutzer Diskussion:Nikolaus Orbis AxelHH (talk) 22:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hallo!
- Ich habe mich gemeldet und die Freigabe durch den Künstler, in dessen Auftrag und mit dessen Beteiligung ich den Artikel erststellt habe, wurde eingereicht.
- Nikolaus Orbis Nikolaus Orbis (talk) 08:32, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 11:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Is Dr. Nix a physician? 186.173.79.57 13:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Personal photo by non-contributors (F10). --Эlcobbola talk 03:12, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Own work? 186.173.79.57 18:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Personal photo by non-contributors (F10). --Эlcobbola talk 03:12, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by ViktorEmmanuel (talk · contribs)
[edit]Obviously not own works. Please provide a source and a proper license.
- File:Victor emmanuel III in 1939.png
- File:Victoremmanuel III colorized.png
- File:Victor-emmanuel-iii-takes-the-salute-1939.png
- File:FCS00234.jpg
- File:S-l1600 (7).png
- File:CB000894.jpg
- File:- French Photographer - Portrait of Victor Emmanuel III of Italy (1869-1947) King of - (MeisterDrucke-602836).jpg
- File:Zsr pcms577 02 27k8a.jpg
- File:440277-1388s484316.jpg
- File:3lkj1.jpg
- File:E0982d37.jpg
- File:1905-H00551s4.jpg
- File:1905-H005514.jpg
- File:Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia Aosta.jpg
- File:Regina Elena 1918.jpg
- File:GrassoneyFCS000f227.jpg
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_King_of_-_(MeisterDrucke-602836).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Yann (talk) 08:20, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep File:Regina Elena 1918.jpg, File:1905-H005514.jpg, and File:1905-H00551s4.jpg should be kept because they probably qualify as PD-OLD. I don't really care about the other images though. So they can be deleted. --Adamant1 (talk) 05:56, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep All, I fixed the license, 1953 is the cutoff date in EU for anonymous works, TinEye shows none attributed to a named photographer. --RAN (talk) 05:53, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- OK thanks, but the dates are still wrong (File:1905-H005514.jpg and no source), and {{PD-old-assumed-expired}} is better for pre-1903 works. Also it would be useful to know how the uploader got these images. Yann (talk) 07:24, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), and ViktorEmmanuel: I fixed all those where a date was provided. Please fix the remaining. Thanks, Yann (talk) 13:34, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1, @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) and @Yann: I added the proper source at Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia Aosta.jpg, it is a photograph by Mario Nunes Vais (died 1932) dated 1918. 83.61.231.21 22:03, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- That's fine. I have no problem with the ones were the dates and whatnot have been fixed being kept. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 22:08, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), and ViktorEmmanuel: I fixed all those where a date was provided. Please fix the remaining. Thanks, Yann (talk) 13:34, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- All OK, except File:FCS00234.jpg. What the date of this? Yann (talk) 10:42, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: All fixed now. --Yann (talk) 10:51, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Duplikat von File:7C3175A8.jpg Hallwyler5200 (talk) 07:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 18:52, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
No merece guardar su foto como usuario porque no lo es. 186.173.79.57 01:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
![01:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2023/04/03#c-186.173.79.57-20230403010000-File:Станислав_"SlarD"_Калугин.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination, not a contributor. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:37, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
![19:37, 25 April 2023 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2023/04/03#c-P199-20230425193700-File:Станислав_"SlarD"_Калугин.jpg){kind=link}
Blogspot 186.173.79.57 01:07, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:37, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
No es trabajo original. 186.173.79.57 01:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: duplicate of File:George Joseph Olakkengil.jpg. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:39, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Hasibul Hasan 23 kb 186.173.79.57 01:15, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: taken from FB and out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:40, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
No es trabajo original 186.173.79.57 01:16, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, and out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:43, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
1972 own work 186.173.79.57 01:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Historical photo, missing essential info. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:45, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Own work? Quién es? 186.173.79.57 01:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Historical photo, missing essential info. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:45, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
1971 own work 186.173.79.57 01:21, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Historical photo, missing essential info. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:45, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Album cover CoffeeEngineer (talk) 01:21, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:46, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Cover art CoffeeEngineer (talk) 01:22, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:46, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
71 KB own work 186.173.79.57 01:22, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:46, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Album cover CoffeeEngineer (talk) 01:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:45, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Unidentified, probably non-notable woman. Description "русский литератор" is on uploader's almost every photo and often this is wrong. Out of project scope? Taivo (talk) 07:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:49, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Depicted people are unidentified, probably non-notable. The event is unidentified. Probably the photo is uploaded for self-promotional purpose. Taivo (talk) 07:45, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:49, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Perikli Hanxhari, the sculptor according to FB description, is still alive – it's a modern work, only the object has died long ago – copyright violation Albinfo (talk) 09:43, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:52, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
unused for 4 yeras Krzysiek 123456789 (talk) 11:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, redundant. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:53, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Uninformative, unclear, random photograph without any educational value. Mlang.Finn (talk) 11:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:53, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Derivative work with no indication that the original image is PD. Nthep (talk) 11:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:54, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Not relevant Shijithvc (talk) 12:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:54, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Not Relevant Shijithvc (talk) 12:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:54, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
self-promotion Pierre cb (talk) 12:59, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:55, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
screencap from a television show, copyright not owned by uploader discospinster (talk) 13:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:55, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
From facebook 186.173.79.57 14:27, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:55, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Own pic just for his own article on fr wikipedia without being known. Article deleted. Supertoff (talk) 15:21, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:56, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
COM:SS from social media, also potentially out of scope A1Cafel (talk) 16:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:57, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 16:14, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:57, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo, also appears to be a COM:DW A1Cafel (talk) 16:15, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:57, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
File:Celebrity Wardrobe Stylist Pilar Scratch attends "Hard To Earn" Podcast Celebrating Mase with Avery Artistry and Chef Lexis Gonzales of The Food Networks "Chopped Sweets".jpg
[edit]
COM:SS from a social media account A1Cafel (talk) 16:21, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:57, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Unencyclopedically offensive title, "offensive words and offensive images should not be included unless they are treated in an encyclopedic manner." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Offensive_material 31.20.106.40 17:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep: No valid reason for deletion. File can be renamed. In addition, rules of Wikipedia cannot be applied in any case here on Commons. --Achim55 (talk) 17:39, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: certainly in scope of Category:Cattle slaughtering. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:58, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Juan Carlos Arteaga 186.173.79.57 17:49, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:59, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Me encantan el nombre del archivo y los edits de esta persona 186.173.79.57 17:51, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope, no contributions by this user. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Nice vacation picture which isn't an own work. 186.173.79.57 18:00, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
History has been made? Not before deleting this junk... 186.173.79.57 18:05, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:07, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Uploaded another file to look like a user... 186.173.79.57 18:25, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Delete this before the fire catches the F10 person. 186.173.79.57 18:31, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Meaningless image from Facebook 186.173.79.57 18:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:07, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
F10 pose 186.173.79.57 18:36, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Category male shoulders? 186.173.79.57 19:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
It is difficult to value images where the head is cropped away Wildone.dk (talk) 11:28, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:30, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
COM:PORN Mjrmtg (talk) 22:12, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:19, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
not educational Alek01913 (talk) 05:59, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per COM:CSD#F10. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 09:42, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 11:37, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Low quality COM:NUDE photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 03:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Not the same as any of the multiple previously deleted images of the same name. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 14:55, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- So what? Delete all the same. 186.173.79.57 20:46, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete we have enough of this Dronebogus (talk) 05:48, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:11, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 | Welcome, Wikipedians! This deletion discussion is generating interest on Wikipedia. If you are a Wikipedian without much experience of Commons, your input here is welcome, but please be aware of Commons' policies, particularly deletion policy and project scope (criteria for inclusion). Note also that, like Wikipedia deletion discussions, Commons deletion discussions are not decided by voting. You may find Commons:For Wikipedians helpful as an introduction to Commons. |
The creator of this file is currently “in the dock” at enwiki’s ANI for some highly questionable race-related edits. In particular this file was brought to light (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=1147948468#Images) as being extremely misleading at best and possibly racist propaganda at worst. Dronebogus (talk) 05:49, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete - Per nom and discussion on en.wiki ANI. Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- hello? I would dispute this? Neither am I "in the docks", nor have I made any "race-related edits", neither questionable nor non-questionable. Nor is the image being suggested for deletionn here tied in any way to my personal fate, what sort of rationale is this? I would ask User:Dronebogus in what way the diagram is "misleading" (let alone "propaganda")? Is it "misleading" to suggest that Homo sapiens in anthropological literature has a phylogeny? What? --Dbachmann (talk) 07:25, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- See the above link, and please respond there. Dronebogus (talk) 02:28, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete The synthesis concerns raised at the discussion linked in the nomination are enough to indicate that the image is not encyclopedically suitable. XOR'easter (talk) 10:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Original Research authored by a bigot, on the verge of being booted from the project, are unwelcome. ValarianB (talk) 15:09, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Premature while the ANI threads are in progress. There is not yet a consensus for a topic ban, or to find that this image is original research. Several of the delete votes are personal attacks in violation of civility policies. Sennalen (talk) 21:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Which ones? Please be specific and report these "personal attacks" to an administrator. If you cannot do this, or are unwilling to, please strike your comment - but note also that Commons does not have a "No personal attacks" policy, which you probably didn't know because the above is your very first edit here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:06, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- While OR is forbidden on enwiki it is not on Commons. Appropriate changes to file should be made, ie. filename change and description change to clearly state it's not factually correct (if it isn't). A09 (talk) 10:57, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. The main "source" for this image is figure 3 from this paper (freely accessible via preprint server). However, there are significant unexplained deviations from the published figure, some of which are handwaved in the lengthy image description. The most charitable interpretation is that this image is misinformation, the product of a non-specialist editor haphazardly synthesizing multiple scientific papers that they do not fully understand. The less charitable interpretation is that this is w:scientific racism propaganda masquerading as mainstream science. It should be deleted in either case. Axem Titanium (talk) 06:14, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- To be clear, my deletion rationale is not based in Wikipedia's OR/SYNTH policies. It is based on the fact that Commons should not be free file hosting for misinformation (see COM:HOST). There is no "educational purpose" for misinformation. Commons need not host racists' propaganda solely because it is CC-licensed. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:19, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete; clear synthesis even by the most charitable interpretation, with far too much deviation from its main source. Going over the sources, none of them individually contain anything that could individually support the image's content, and their contexts are too different for the way they're composited here to be an uncontroversial calculation. --Aquillion (talk) 22:16, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per Aquillion. Kurtis (talk) 10:06, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. This file is still in use across the main space of twelve different Wikimedia projects. We don't delete images from Commons simply because we are morally outraged by them and Commons does not make editorial decisions for other projects. COM:INUSE policy is very clear that if an image is being used on a project it is within scope. IronGargoyle (talk) 01:30, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- The fact that an image is in use is not a policy-based reason for keeping - the argument here is not that the image is not in scope, it is that it is misinformation. If the image is inaccurate or misleading, being used in many Wikipedias is a strong reason to delete, so that misinformation is not widely spread. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:35, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- Is that Commons deletion policy at COM:MISLEADING or COM:INACCURATE? I seem to be missing those links. I am not arguing that the image has any merit whatsoever. I am saying that COM:INUSE is absolutely the issue here. There are good reasons why Commons stays out of these disputes and upholding COM:INUSE is essential for the role that Commons has. If an image is within scope, freely licensed, and not illegal, that is absolutely a reason for keeping. If you don't think everything in use should be in scope, you should take that argument to a policy talk page or the Village Pump and try to gain consensus for it. IronGargoyle (talk) 02:33, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- We are not asking 500 different projects to remove this potentially very inaccurate and misleading image when we can just ignore all rules and delete it. Your argument is ludicrous dogma that ignores the core reason commons exists— to educate people —in favor of spreading misinformation. Dronebogus (talk) 08:48, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- "Ignore all rules" is an essay on Commons (once firmly rejected by the community via deletion) unlike its policy status on English Wikipedia. I think it should be readily apparent that COM:INUSE (which you derisively describe as "ludicrous dogma") is actually essential to the health of Wikimedia Commons. Does it mean we sometimes have to keep things we think are awful? Yes. But what it protects is more important. IronGargoyle (talk) 18:01, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- In use applies to bad quality images, not obviously, objectively wrong ones, as far as I can tell. Dronebogus (talk) 18:25, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- This is not a moral offense issue, this is an informational one. Stop trying to personalize the argument. Dronebogus (talk) 18:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- I am not personalizing anything. Did I badger your nomination or the delete vote that Beyond My Ken made? No. I am simply explaining why I believe policy mandates that we must keep this image as long as it is in use. From a plain reading of COM:INUSE, I strongly disagree with your interpretation. As for the moral vs. informational distinction, one can be morally outraged if they feel that false information is present on Commons. That is the tenor I picked up from many of the comments in this deletion request. IronGargoyle (talk) 19:58, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- "Ignore all rules" is an essay on Commons (once firmly rejected by the community via deletion) unlike its policy status on English Wikipedia. I think it should be readily apparent that COM:INUSE (which you derisively describe as "ludicrous dogma") is actually essential to the health of Wikimedia Commons. Does it mean we sometimes have to keep things we think are awful? Yes. But what it protects is more important. IronGargoyle (talk) 18:01, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- We are not asking 500 different projects to remove this potentially very inaccurate and misleading image when we can just ignore all rules and delete it. Your argument is ludicrous dogma that ignores the core reason commons exists— to educate people —in favor of spreading misinformation. Dronebogus (talk) 08:48, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- Is that Commons deletion policy at COM:MISLEADING or COM:INACCURATE? I seem to be missing those links. I am not arguing that the image has any merit whatsoever. I am saying that COM:INUSE is absolutely the issue here. There are good reasons why Commons stays out of these disputes and upholding COM:INUSE is essential for the role that Commons has. If an image is within scope, freely licensed, and not illegal, that is absolutely a reason for keeping. If you don't think everything in use should be in scope, you should take that argument to a policy talk page or the Village Pump and try to gain consensus for it. IronGargoyle (talk) 02:33, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- The fact that an image is in use is not a policy-based reason for keeping - the argument here is not that the image is not in scope, it is that it is misinformation. If the image is inaccurate or misleading, being used in many Wikipedias is a strong reason to delete, so that misinformation is not widely spread. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:35, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- Following what IronGargoyle said, it is an odd gray area of Commons policy. I know I've said before that we really need an exception added to INUSE for obvious misinformation/disinformation which is not in the spirit of COM:SCOPE even if it managed to be used somewhere. Or perhaps an alternative is to have a specific process for handling misinformation. It would need to be clearly labeled as such on the file page, in an appropriate category, taken out of misleading categories, and notice provided to any project that uses it (perhaps with a pre-translated template to post to village pumps or equivalent pages). A simple "keep" doesn't IMO address the issue of misinformation sufficiently. That said, I'm not going to issue a !vote here. I haven't followed these discussions and don't know enough about the subject to make a call. — Rhododendrites talk | 21:39, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete notwithstanding the concerns of ANI, the diagram also appears very very misleading. I am still trying to figure out the point but there is a lot that is omitted. The fact that there are only five labels, four of which are in Africa, shows just how misleading this chart is. A more complete diagram that accurately shows human evolution and spread throughout the old and new world would be more suited for Wikimedia Commons. Aasim (talk) 23:50, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep per IronGargoyle. OR is not implemented on Commons and appropriate changes to file description/filename should be made. A09 (talk) 10:58, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Maybe we should implement some of these tried-and-tested ideas from WP on Commons already Dronebogus (talk) 14:46, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- I suggest taking this to community portal, not everyone sees this DR now. A09 (talk) 19:26, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Maybe we should implement some of these tried-and-tested ideas from WP on Commons already Dronebogus (talk) 14:46, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep There is a very thin line between lifting a diagramme wholesale from an article and adapting it. Besides the inverted axis, there is extremely little that was changed between the original file from Schlebusch et al. and this graphic. "The fact that there are only five labels, four of which are in Africa" -- this objection to the file by Aasim confuses me. There are the exact same six lables (five for African lineages, one for other lineages) in the original and in Dab's version. Please have another look at it here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320101464_Southern_African_ancient_genomes_estimate_modern_human_divergence_to_350000-260000_years_ago. I do not see any adaptations that would justify (a) a deletion of the present svg file or (b) construing anything in here as a racist dogwhistle. Trigaranus (talk) 22:07, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Request for clarification: Which part of the current svg file's content warrants the deletion? Is it the representation of modern populations (in which dab follows the original linked just above), or is it the representation of older populations, including their admixture to modern-day non-African populations? The Denisovan and Neanderthal admixtures themselves are not controversial in any way. Please spell out the misinformation for me. I seem to be missing most of it. Trigaranus (talk) 23:20, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Reiterate: I seem to be a bit late to the party, but I would still appreciate commentary on the content (not on dab, whom the above link mostly focuses on). What information in this file establishes a need to have it deleted, or for that matter expunged from articles it had previously been used in? The deletion request does feel very much like an ancillary to a wider discussion. That wider discussion does not have much bearing on the fact that the information in this file is a fair representation of Schlebusch et al. combined with some well-established and popularly known reseach (e.g. by Svante Pääbo or David Reich) regarding Neanderthals and Denisovans. Trigaranus (talk) 20:39, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- I have a perfect storm of seemingly too much time on my hands and a tendency to procrastinate, so I've taken a look at some of the objections raised above:
- As far as WP:SYNTH is concerned, the salient point there is that editors must "not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any source". This is not an objection that would apply to this file, since there is no conclusion presented. The only candidate for synthesis is that it includes a more explicit illustration for the Neanderthal and Denisovan admixture events, which the original only hints at by pointing those lineages toward the non-African modern lineages in a dotted line. No undue synthesis and no conclusion.
- Nor would WP:OI apply, as: "Original images created by a Wikipedian are not considered original research, so long as they do not illustrate or introduce unpublished ideas or arguments, the core reason behind the "No original research" policy." (italics in source). There is no unpublished idea being illustrated or introduced, and the file comes with a rather lengthy apparatus of sources used. As far as I can see, it is well-sourced and does not present or introduce any conclusions, let alone controversial ones. What did I miss? Trigaranus (talk) 13:03, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Last bit is a comment from the linked discussion above that I find noteworthy. It refers to the colour scheme: "This (the colour scheme) means it looks like the figure says that the modern groups are equivalent to different species, which is a racist dog-whistle" (made by the user NeverRainsButPours). Are commenters aware that the colour visualisation with different colours for modern populations just reflects a similar visualisation through different colours in Schlebusch et al.? I have a hard time finding this file (and the other ones associated with it that illustrate a greater time depth) problematic. Trigaranus (talk) 13:19, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- Summary: It seems that, after a rather heated debate, everyone has somehow lost interest in deleting this file (after removing it from the English WP). I would like to use this lull to address some of the criticisms brought up above:
- Axem wrote above that "Commons should not be free file hosting for misinformation" -- I did not find any disinformation; all the information in the file appears to be sourced in the extensive apparatus that comes with it.
- Aquillon wrote that it was synthesis and too much "deviation from its main source". But as I pointed out above, WP:SYNTH does not disqualify this file as it does not arrive at an undue synthesis with conclusions not found in the literature it cited.
- Aasim must have looked at a different file than the one I looked up. The labels I have for modern populations are the same ones Dab used in his file.
- ValarianB wrote that "Original Research authored by a bigot" was unwelcome. And I feel this is where the entire issue surrounding this file lies.
- Valarian's comment begs the questions (a) whether an editor's personal opinions matter when it comes to use of their files, and more importantly (b) whether Dbachmann would actually fit the description of being "a bigot", which I highly doubt. It appears that the whole controversy stems from how we interpret Dbachmann/Dab's positions on race. So let's inspect that elephant in the room:
- Behaviour He undoubtedly stepped on a hornets' nest in 2018 when it came to anthropology and species borders, and it has now come back to haunt him. I suspect his lack of caution in this exchange has very little to do with racism (as in alt-right) and a lot to do with his personality type (as in the spectrum). Let's say a whole bunch of us are not exactly neurotypical, and if you're single-minded enough to end up in the top 200 WP editors by edit count (like Dab has), I'm inclined to allow for some inability to "read the room". This is not meant as an insult to him or to any of us, but let's be honest: some of us are weird (ask my partner why I am so hung up about this), but not necessarily bigoted.
- Speciation in homo As a taxonomy and aDNA nerd myself, yep he was wrong in 2018 when he suggested that San people might be classified as a separate species in modern anthropology -- that would imply at least diminished fertility for mixed couples on genetic grounds (and nope, there is to my knowledge, unsurprisingly, no indication for that). But the question of speciation (especially in humans) is not a simple black or white issue, and to an almost ridiculous extent so when it comes to prehistoric anthropology. What's a species? And what's a prehistoric species? For the latter: nobody knows. Quite honestly. For instance, Neanderthals obviously were able to procreate with Archaic Humans, but if I read David Reich's stuff carefully enough, Neanderthal DNA might be underrepresented in modern non-African DNA due to some diminished success rate in fertility and some negative selection processes for individual genes after the original admixture events. Even the WP intro to Neanderthals hedges its bets: "an extinct species or subspecies", and refers to the "vagueness of the term species" in its body text.
- Taxonomy based on morphology At the same time, everywhere we have to rely entirely on skeletal remains without aDNA, species lines in prehistoric human populations are more or less drawn at random. The whole measure for "species" (whatever the hell that implies in prehistoric anthropology) is someone looking at teeth or brows or some other wholly random aspect of skeletal morphology, rubbing their chin in a thoughtful manner, and going: "Hmmm... different enough!" And then we get separate homo "types" that are usually Linnaeused / taxonomied as "species" (with assigned labels like Homo heidelbergensis or Homo habilis). Ask any anthropologist: It's frankly an entirely inadequate measure for speciation because it is not a clear measure of anything at all. And yep, up to WWII a large segment of anthropologists were more than happy to apply the same (ir)rationale to the San, the Pygmies, the Andamanese, and everyone else who happens not to be colonially labeled "ethnic". They no longer do it to modern populations because of the entire rat-tail of scientific racism that came with it. But if your measure is skeletal morphology alone, sure you could draw any sort of lines between modern "species" in the sense of prehistoric anthropology. That's what Dbachmann referred to. (He even said: "on purely morphological grounds".) We don't do it anymore in modern anthropology because the consensus is today that species borders are to a large extent negatively defined by persistent fertility of mixed offspring (i.e.: if the offspring is fertile, the parents belong to the same species). And yes, this sounds very weird when applied to humans, but anthropology is a field of zoology after all, and taxonomy can be slapped on all sorts of life forms.
- Use of the word "subspecies" by Dab Yep, it sounds weird to use taxonomy on modern humans. There is a reason why we don't do it. But have a look at the definition of subspecies on WP: "populations that live in different areas and vary in size, shape, or other physical characteristics (morphology), but that can successfully interbreed". Yeah, that's us.
- Dab as a racist Is the originator of our file a racist, then? (I assume you all saw how Dab reacted to being called a racist in 2018.) Racism is the assigning of stereotypical behaviours and their inherent value to different types of humans, usually to people that look "different" (but not always, for example in racism against the Jews, Travellers, or the Irish -- it bleeds into other types of in-group / out-group prejudices). It's the value judgement that does it. As in: "You're genetically in group X, that's why you're worth less than me." And on a softer note: "You're genetically in group X, that's why you drive so badly / eat such spicy food / are such a good doctor" and all that nonsense. It's really quite simple. Probably why it's one of the few things idiots are good at. But what is almost as simple as that is construing anything anyone says regarding "race" distinctions (and yep, that term is even more ill-defined than species) as racism, even if there is no basis to label it as that.
- Conclusion I am frankly a bit surprised at the amount of negativity that came with some of the comments in the entire debate surrounding Dab. In large parts if feels as if he was given two labels by general consensus: (a) a bit of a prick (which is partly true because he tends to be quite crass in his responses); and (b) a racist bigot (which is based on one interpretation of an exchange from 2018). I don't think the way Dab wrote about human taxonomy in 2018 disqualifies this file. It is a very close copy of the same information presented originally in Schlebusch et al., with citations in the apparatus for any visualisations beyond that. The file as it stands holds up to scrutiny. There are no racist dog-whistles in it, and what has been construed as such by NeverRainsButPours in the above discussion is simply copied from the original scientific article. Trigaranus (talk) 08:30, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- I am replying only because I have been pinged, and I will leave it with only one post. Perhaps I should have said 'could be seen as a racist dog-whistle', but certainly the original paper has a lot more context that the figure doesn't and that's why I think the figure is misleading. Schlebusch et al. calls the figure a demographic model, not a phylogeny (because it isn't a phylogeny), and does not include synthesis of other admixture events that it provides no statistical evidence for (see other papers Dbachmann cited that he copied onto the figure). These are significant changes that alter interpretation of human population relationships. There are some minor discrepancies between the way the migrations are labelled that could be seen as misleading, but I could easily chalk that up to the difficulty of creating figures (see Joe's comments in the ANI report). There are also some artistic licenses that would not present a difficulty for experts but would, to me, give the wrong impression to the average reader.
- You no doubt know more than me about the taxonomy of humans and that is why I only commented on how the population-genetic evidence is presented differently between the Schlebusch et al. figure and this figure. Other people expressed concern about Dbachmann's comments which I have purposefully not commented on.
- I would like to stress I was very careful not to give a judgement on Dbachmann's opinion or motives, merely that I felt the figure was misleading and that this could give average readers an interpretation that evidently most people see as racist. 'Construed' implies I have constructed the accusation of racism (i.e have an unfair interpretation) against Dbachmann and I reject this in the strongest possible terms. I could predict this outcome would happen which is why I was trying to be careful but I cannot be held responsible for the actions of other people. It seems clear to me that Wikipedia holds people who write on human evolution to a very high standard, independent of inferring their motives. NeverRainsButPours (talk) 11:34, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- Dear NRBP, thanks for coming over and clarifying. I did get the wrong impression from the way you phrased it, and I appreciate your clarification a lot. Trigaranus (talk) 13:16, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- No worries, I appreciate your sense of fairness. NeverRainsButPours (talk) 13:43, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- Dear NRBP, thanks for coming over and clarifying. I did get the wrong impression from the way you phrased it, and I appreciate your clarification a lot. Trigaranus (talk) 13:16, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Kept: No issues with copyright brought up and the file is COM:INUSE. As the relevant policy notes, Commons does not overrule other projects about what is in scope. If an image is in use on another project (aside from use on talk pages or user pages), that is enough for it to be within scope. files uploaded here do not necessarily need to comply with the Neutral point of view and No original research requirements imposed by many of the Wikipedia sites, and consensus cannot override fundamental Commons Policy. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:44, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Cropped picture from a website without indication of public domain http://www.metalgearsolid.be/david-hayter-parle-de-son-role-sur-snake-et-deception-mgsv-1583.html CoffeeEngineer (talk) 01:17, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination; published online without a free license before upload to Commons and no evidence exists for a free license having been granted by the copyright holder. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:13, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: The uploader is not the author, as per the description CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:42, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. No evidence of permission from the copyright holder. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:23, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Copyright? Is this single contribution of the user own work? See © 2023 Burdette, Koehler, Murphy & Associates. in this page. Wouter (talk) 13:40, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and COM:PRP. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:53, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
copy vio?! no sign of CC whatsoever. JD {æ} 14:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:52, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by EthanCoderre (talk · contribs)
[edit]looks like photo from monitor, here a better version: https://www.amazon.de/-/en/Reconditioned-Ridgid-Drywall-Collated-Screwdriver/dp/B01GWCYQ9U
Avron (talk) 07:49, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:50, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by EthanCoderre (talk · contribs) 2
[edit]Two more obvious photos of a monitor, COM:DW, unknown copyright status of original images.
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:52, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:39, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
Photograph of a photograph, therefore the source and license data don't correspond to the real photo. Taichi (talk) 05:39, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep I added the correct license "PD-Colombia". --RAN (talk) 05:46, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Fixed by RAN, with thanks. --Gbawden (talk) 10:50, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope personal photo Bedivere (talk) 15:11, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- It is an image with the musician Renny Manzano, I think it is a good visual contribution for your article. If what you don't like is that I appear in the image, you can delete the original and leave the cropped one. ChuchoVCJMuzik (talk) 15:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Ticket:2023041310012681 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 19:01, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- Not really the point in this nomination. The image is personal and out of scope. The artist could be kept separately. Bedivere (talk) 21:16, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Krd. --Rosenzweig τ 19:37, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Yann as Speedy (Speedy) and the most recent rationale was: deleted after DR personal out of scope image Yann (talk) 17:33, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy delete It was deleted not because it had no authorization, but because it is a personal and out of scope image. At least that was the whole reason of the previous DR. Bedivere (talk) 18:14, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Alaa :)..! 18:35, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
No evidence to be own work. Taken from internet without free licence Ориенталист (talk) 16:06, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- I did a reverse image search and found an article by MBK with said image. According to the site, the image is from the now defunct Bashkort organization posted on Vkontakte. Other news sites visited provide the same source. So I mess around on Vkontakte to find out more but unfortunately, while the Bashkort page is still up, it seems to have been made private or at the very least is not visible for non-users. I do not own a Vkontakte account so this is as far as I go. I cannot confirm fully that the image is copyrighted but I also cannot confirm otherwise. However, on all the sites I've visited that used the image, not one of them listed the image under any Creative Commons or is mentioned as being in the public domain. In my personal opinion, this image is copyrighted but again, I cannot confirm. I recommend contacting the user that uploaded this image to find out more. ProjectHorizons (talk) 03:38, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, discussion, COM:PCP. --Rosenzweig τ 15:39, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Not own work, taken from the internet without free licence Ориенталист (talk) 16:08, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, [12]. --Rosenzweig τ 15:40, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
Not own work, wrong licence Ориенталист (talk) 16:06, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- The file you give is a color copy of this file. File:Валиди.jpg Buekturan (talk) 12:21, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - coloration is copyrightable and it's not own work. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 06:54, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo of a corporation (non-free content), uploaded under a free license. Flibirigit (talk) 14:42, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- The logo is widely available on the internet, however, it is IHUK's copyright, but as the Chair I am entitled to use it on our listing on Wikipedia. Icemancomethfourth (talk) 15:36, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- You have uploaded the logo as if you personally own the copyright. There is a big difference between that and a logo owned by the IHUK. I have uploaded a correctly licensed fair use photo instead. This can now be deleted. Also, if you are the chairman, then you may have a conflict of interest in editing such articles. Flibirigit (talk) 16:16, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:25, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Files from bad author list, questionable copyright status A1Cafel (talk) 14:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:27, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Files from bad author list, questionable copyright status A1Cafel (talk) 14:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:27, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Files from bad author list, questionable copyright status A1Cafel (talk) 14:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:27, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Facebook, F1 186.173.79.57 19:52, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- This file should not be deleted as person meets notability requirements, recent press in Business Insider, AP News along with coverage in publications like Forbes.
- This image is now being used in the subject's Wiki page:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimeshan_Naidoo Actiph (talk) 22:48, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - Facebook image. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:28, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
use the large original image and use downsized thumbnails in articles Prototyperspective (talk) 20:01, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion - in use widely. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:29, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
so low resolution, there is no realistic way to use this image in wikimedia projects. ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 20:48, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Этот файл - фрагмент файла File:Советские офицеры у Памятника павшим Советским воинам в Тиргартене.8.5.1982.jpg. Нужен, как портрет к статье
- Гордиенко, Вячеслав Митрофанович ALDOR46 (talk) 21:57, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- google translated: This file is a fragment of file File:Soviet officers at the Monument to the Fallen Soviet Soldiers in the Tiergarten.8.5.1982.jpg. Needed as a portrait for the article Gordienko, Vyacheslav Mitrofanovich
- but is has so low resolution???? you should use un-cropped photo. take a look at this: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Panoramic view of Kurtboğazı Dam (cropped-dam).jpg . it is the low res crop of this file: File:Panoramic view of Kurtboğazı Dam.jpg @ALDOR46 ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 11:24, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- File:Советские офицеры у Памятника павшим Советским воинам в Тиргартене.8.5.1982.jpg ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 11:24, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- i uploaded better resolution, but still looking bad. ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 11:33, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- after uploading new version, i think Weak keep ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 10:31, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: no valid reason for deletion -- in use. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
Unused fictional logo Trade (talk) 11:36, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Comment IMO the template is sufficient to indicate it is not an official logo. RodRabelo7 (talk) 02:09, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
- It is also not within scope Trade (talk) 13:47, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 13:01, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
possible copyvio (photo by BERND SCHUMACHER) M2k~dewiki (talk) 12:04, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 13:01, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Gbb gun image profile 186.173.79.57 14:14, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 13:02, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
If in scope needs OTRS. 186.173.79.57 14:17, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: No OTRS. --Herby talk thyme 13:02, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
unlikely to be own work Didym (talk) 15:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Weak delete. This file appears on the pdc website (warning: will take a while to load on that page; see direct link), but the file appears to have been uploaded there in June 2021 (the photo was uploaded to Commons in May 2021). It's not impossible that it's own work, but I do have significant doubt, and we don't really have good evidence that the uploader is the photographer's copyright holder. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:51, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Herby talk thyme 13:03, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Is it too old to delete for lying as own work? 186.173.79.57 18:08, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Certainly not own work; person in the photo died in 1941, so it could be PD-Italy, but as there isn't any information on the real source, place and time of publication, we can't even be sure that it's a photo from Italy (though it seems likely), there is no sufficient data to keep it. --Gestumblindi (talk) 18:22, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Appears to be a derivative work A1Cafel (talk) 16:22, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:45, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Shakil O'Neal? 186.173.79.57 20:15, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:42, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Some buddy 186.173.79.57 20:26, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of scope. --Gbawden (talk) 08:42, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
No own work 186.173.79.57 20:47, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of scope. --Gbawden (talk) 08:43, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Ser Exif, no own work 186.173.79.57 20:49, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Probably own work but out of scope. --Gbawden (talk) 08:43, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Not a user 186.173.79.57 20:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of scope. --Gbawden (talk) 08:44, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by H.alyafei111 (talk · contribs)
[edit]User blocked for copyvios, complex flags without a source, uncertain copyright.
- File:شعار الجنوب العربي الفيدرالي المقترح.png
- File:علم البطولات الجنوبية الرياضية - عدن.png
- File:علم سلطنة العوالق السفلى.png
- File:علم امارة رؤوس الجبال ، الشحوح.png
- File:علم جيش الاتحاد النظامي " الليوي " اتحاد الجنوب العربي.png
- File:علم المجلس الانتقالي الجنوبي.png
Yann (talk) 19:39, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: all files already deleted by Gbawden. --Rosenzweig τ 11:38, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by H.alyafei111 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused, potentially fictional flag. Translate says "Flag of Moscow and Aden" but this is neither the flag of Moscow or the flag of the Colony of Aden.
The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:20, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 T★C 16:45, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
This file is not free. Vladimir Solovjev (talk) 08:41, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:55, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Is this necessary? 186.173.79.57 20:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Weak delete The file is in use at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Guests, so I don't think we should delete this in light of COM:SCOPE's explicit instruction that If an image is in use on another project (aside from use on talk pages or user pages), that is enough for it to be within scope. The page is neither a talk page, nor a user page, so we cannot delete for reasons of scope. HOWEVER, the image is a photograph of a person and the uploader appears to be the person who is depicted in the photograph rather than the photographer. And, for that reason, this should be deleted in light of COM:PRP, as we do not have evidence that either the uploader is the copyright holder or that the copyright holder has otherwise released the photograph under a suitable free license. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:39, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per RTH. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Fake coat of arms 2001:448A:11A8:1911:ED7B:E057:88AA:C7F0 22:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: COM:INUSE. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
File:U.S. Ambassador to Nicaragua Kevin K. Sullivan welcomed 222 individuals who had been imprisoned by the Government of Nicaragua for exercising their fundamental freedoms- U.S. Department of State in Washington, D.C., on March 31, 2023.jpg
[edit]
COM:SS of non-free content A1Cafel (talk) 16:30, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- From COM:SS - "If all content shown is in the public domain, then the screenshot is also, because there is no creative contribution added when creating a screenshot. This may not be true in all jurisdictions, but holds at least in the U.S. (due to Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. (...)"
- This image is the United States Ambassador to Nicaragua in performance of his officials duties on a secure U.S. Government video link from the U. S. Embassy in Managua, Nicaragua to an official event hosted by the U.S. Secretary of State at the United States Department of State in Washington, D.C. -- Ooligan (talk) 07:16, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per Ooligan. --Gbawden (talk) 08:58, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Too fat, and not own work 186.173.79.57 19:30, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: PCP, unlikely to be own work. --Gbawden (talk) 08:57, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Own work? 186.173.79.57 20:52, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Question: Are we asking about the photograph, or of the sculpture. For the latter case, COM:FOP Bangladesh is pretty clear that taking photographs of sculptures and works of artistic craftsmanship is A-OK. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:43, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: PCP - unlikely to be own work. --Gbawden (talk) 08:59, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Scope would be? 186.173.79.57 20:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:58, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
this is not own work [[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 07:14, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Likely Out of Scope. --Gbawden (talk) 09:13, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
No es own work. 186.173.79.57 12:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --Gbawden (talk) 09:15, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
_-_Jean-Francois_Robert.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_Jean-Francois_Robert.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Otrs of the artist is requiered. 186.173.79.57 14:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
![14:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2023/04/03#c-186.173.79.57-20230403141800-File:"Paris,_-25m"_(1991)_-_Jean-Francois_Robert.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:16, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
![09:16, 30 August 2023 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2023/04/03#c-Gbawden-20230830091600-File:"Paris,_-25m"_(1991)_-_Jean-Francois_Robert.jpg){kind=link}
Sorry, in my opinion the photo is out of project scope due to bad quality. Taivo (talk) 06:33, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry, not sorry. Der Uploader des Fotos ist dauerhaft gesperrt und kann daher keine Argumente gegen den Löschantrag vorbringen. Da der DR von einem Admin kommt, gehe ich davon aus, dass das bekannt war. Ich gehe davon aus, dass unter den 8 Mrd Menschen auf der Erde durchaus welche sind, die dieses Foto für irgendwas gerne nutzen oder künftig nutzen möchten. Abgesehen davon gibt es genügend Urheberrechtsverletzungen (auch vom Uploader dieses Bildes!), für die ein DR nötig wäre. Ein DR für dieses Bild ist Verschwendung von Ressourcen und nicht nur flüssig, sondern sogar überflüssig (Zitat aus Tote tragen kein Karos oder einem anderen Film, villeicht Pink Panter). C.Suthorn (talk) 10:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- This was a bad argumentation. Please explain educational value of the photo.
Das war eine schlechte Argumentation. Bitte erklären Sie den pädagogischen Wert des Fotos. Taivo (talk) 11:31, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- This was a bad argumentation. Please explain educational value of the photo.
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 09:51, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
No evidence, that the photographer is 70 years dead, no evidence of anonymous publication. Maybe this is copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 07:04, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- No question that this is in the public domain in the USA (it is from before 1928). That leaves whether it is free in Russia; {{PD-RusEmpire}} applies to photographs published prior to 7 November 1917. Unfortunately, that means that this photograph would have had to have been taken in his first week in the 12th army; the source says that the photo is from his time in that army, where he was in charge beginning November 15, 1917. Per COM:PRP, I lean towards deletion, though I do wonder if this is an anonymous work that has already entered the public domain in Russia (publish+70) due to the author being unknown. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
- Unfortunately we even cannot be sure, that the work is in public domain in USA – evidence of publication before 1928 is needed for that. Taivo (talk) 07:28, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Kept: {{PD-RusEmpire}}. --Yann (talk) 09:52, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Nikkimaria as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Photograph of a sculptural work in the US, no indication that the work itself is PD/free. Converting to DR per COM:CSD#F3. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:15, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Various sources indicate that Louise Nevelson created the sculptures for installation at St. Peter's Church in 1977. I don't see a copyright notice in any photos of the work that I could find, so it would be {{PD-US-no notice}}. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:22, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: as per KoH. --Yann (talk) 09:55, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Yann as no permission (No permission since). Permission for photo is obvious, converting to DR per COM:CSD#F3. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:41, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- I mean for the board. Yann (talk) 08:18, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Photograph taken in a public place. "freedom of panorama". --Gnrc (talk) 14:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- There is no "freedom of panorama" in France. See COM:France. Yann (talk) 19:23, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per the authorship information at the bottom (using literal Google Translate): Source: Drawing by A. HERNOUD from the book. The Roman aqueduct of the Gier, Preinventory of the monuments and artistic riches of the Rhône, around Jean Burdy, 1996. As there is no commercial freedom of panorama in France, the commercially-licensed photo violates panel author's copyright. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 02:07, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: See above. --Yann (talk) 09:57, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Probably this is not own photo of the media, because their own media marked by watermark photo is the same as on plague. Some photo author of the article taken from another site. If this photo will be delete, please aloo see File:Васильєв Дмитро Миколайович (військовик), 1.jpg Kharkivian (talk) 09:49, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
,_1.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Delete Surely this is not own photo of the media. --Микола Василечко (talk) 15:58, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 10:01, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Urheberrechtlich geschütztes Foto, ausgegeben als "eigenes Werk" durch vermutliche Paid Editorin Jbergner (talk) 09:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 10:02, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Der Firmensitz ist seit 01.04.2023 nicht mehr aktuell Denic-presse (talk) 10:04, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep No reason for deletion. Kein Löschgrund. Ggf. die Beschreibung anpassen und die Datei evtl. umbenennen mit Jahresangabe o. ä. --Rosenzweig τ 10:17, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. In use. --Yann (talk) 10:02, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Не свободная лицензия Войчех Замбровски (talk) 13:47, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: 2004 publication. No evidence of a free license or public domain. --Yann (talk) 10:04, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
1984 photo. 186.173.79.57 14:16, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. No evidence of a free license or public domain. --Yann (talk) 10:04, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
A los hombres no les enseñan que sentarse con las piernas abiertas no es muy educado? 186.173.79.57 16:24, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Personal picture by non contributor, out of scope. --Yann (talk) 10:08, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Copyright Issue. This was not published between 1928 and 1963. It was only issued in 1984 on home video and you can clearly see the copyright from 1983 in the opening credits. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:05, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep per the following reasons quoted from here :
- An unpublished work only conserves the copyright during the life of the author, so when Ed Wood died the copyright expired. This work could have been registered during the first 28 years but this should have been done by the author while he was alive.
- The widow of Ed Wood that signed the contract with Wade Williams to transfer the rights of the movie, was not married with Ed Wood, its marriage was cancelled 3 weeks from the wedding in the state of Nevada. So Ed Wood's widow wasn't a legal heirs of the Wood's assets and obviously the register in the USCO files is not a valid claim.
— Racconish 💬 19:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- This specific transfer which was pulled from YouTube is pulled from a copywritten dvd transfer, which is not free of copyright however. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:06, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: as per Racconish. --Yann (talk) 10:11, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Este vaquero hizo su propio artículo, que vergüenza! 186.173.79.57 18:10, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Personal picture by non contributor, out of scope. --Yann (talk) 10:12, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
I don't think this would qualify as a simple photograph per the license and the photographer died in 2017. So it's likely copyrighted until at least 2087. Adamant1 (talk) 06:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- This is a simple "journalistic" photo, obsv: the subjects are not posed, no "artistic" aspect emerges (style, technique, lighting, etc.)... what tenet of "public domain" would it violate? — danyele 14:57, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- I am surprised at the 20 year provision for "simple" photos. Surely this distinction has been discussed before, for other Italian photos. What kind of outcomes did we get in those discussions? Geo Swan (talk) 04:02, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- From what I remember it mostly or only applies to things like simple photographs of landscapes where there isn't any involvement in the setting by the photographer or them doing any setup/framing of the image before hand, and the setting isn't complex. Like a random shot of the desert that was taken without prior preparation or framing of the shot. I'm sure there's some DRs out there related to this that could answer the question better if you wanted to look for them instead of just concern trolling though. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:19, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Candid photos like this have historically (on Commons) been considered to be "simple" photos. —holly {chat} 18:26, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Nikkimaria as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Photograph of a sculptural work in the US, no indication that the work itself is PD/free. Converting to DR per COM:CSD#F3. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:14, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- The plaza was dedicated in 1977 but the sculptures were not installed until 1978 - see for example her foundation biography which includes a timeline of her works (and which would seem likely to be the definitive source on the matter). Nikkimaria (talk) 22:27, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hmm, looks like there's no definitive answer on the Internet (after all, primary sources are not considered RS for Wikipedia so I wouldn't overweight them). Let's wait to see if anyone finds clear evidence establishing why one of the claims is right and the other is wrong; otherwise, we'll delete per COM:PRP. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Just seeing this discussion now, so wanted to chip in as the article author. The plaza was renamed after the artist and dedicated in 1978 and that's the official installation date (here's one scholarly source cited in the article: https://sculpturemagazine.art/the-perils-of-public-art-louise-nevelson-plaza/). A few questions and/or complications. 1), Given that this was a public commission, would the installation constitute "work for hire", granting copyrights to the city? 2) It underwent renovation between 2007 and 2010 and the sculptures have been restored and re-installed, significantly altering the artist's original design. Given that Nevelson's design stipulated the placement of the works, this photograph now technically depicts a public park, designed and paid for by the city, which opened in 2010, rather than the original installation. That might mean that post-1989 laws should apply. I am a bit unclear, however, on what that means for the work itself, since we're now talking about city-owned land and city-owned property without the artist's participation. Could one argue that, in light of the re-design, any depiction of the sculptures falls under de-minimis? Ppt91 (talk) 18:20, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
- If the redesign was substantive enough to support a de minimis argument for the original work, it would be substantive enough to warrant copyright protection of its own. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:46, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- Right, except would it be copyright protection for public park design? I don't believe we should go by 1978. The contemporary context fundamentally alters the artist's original intentions and design, thus theoretically invalidating the 1978 original copyright which applied to the installation as such.
- If we are to treat these sculptures individually, and that seems like the only logical way considering redesign, then we should go by the original manufacturing and installation date of 1977 per historical records confirmed by multiple WP:RS including the one above. That would mean {{PD-US no notice}} and thus keep. Ppt91 (talk) 16:45, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- If the redesign was substantive enough to support a de minimis argument for the original work, it would be substantive enough to warrant copyright protection of its own. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:46, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
- Just seeing this discussion now, so wanted to chip in as the article author. The plaza was renamed after the artist and dedicated in 1978 and that's the official installation date (here's one scholarly source cited in the article: https://sculpturemagazine.art/the-perils-of-public-art-louise-nevelson-plaza/). A few questions and/or complications. 1), Given that this was a public commission, would the installation constitute "work for hire", granting copyrights to the city? 2) It underwent renovation between 2007 and 2010 and the sculptures have been restored and re-installed, significantly altering the artist's original design. Given that Nevelson's design stipulated the placement of the works, this photograph now technically depicts a public park, designed and paid for by the city, which opened in 2010, rather than the original installation. That might mean that post-1989 laws should apply. I am a bit unclear, however, on what that means for the work itself, since we're now talking about city-owned land and city-owned property without the artist's participation. Could one argue that, in light of the re-design, any depiction of the sculptures falls under de-minimis? Ppt91 (talk) 18:20, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hmm, looks like there's no definitive answer on the Internet (after all, primary sources are not considered RS for Wikipedia so I wouldn't overweight them). Let's wait to see if anyone finds clear evidence establishing why one of the claims is right and the other is wrong; otherwise, we'll delete per COM:PRP. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- The plaza was dedicated in 1977 but the sculptures were not installed until 1978 - see for example her foundation biography which includes a timeline of her works (and which would seem likely to be the definitive source on the matter). Nikkimaria (talk) 22:27, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Mdaniels5757: Per COM:PACUSA, works installed in public in 1978 or later are no longer considered "published" by virtue of installation. So either we need to demonstrate that authorized copies were sold without notice, or that the work was installed prior to 1978. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:20, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, thank you. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 14:44, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Mdaniels5757: Per COM:PACUSA, works installed in public in 1978 or later are no longer considered "published" by virtue of installation. So either we need to demonstrate that authorized copies were sold without notice, or that the work was installed prior to 1978. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:20, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: As Mdaniels5757 has done a copyright records search and found nothing, we would have to consider it unpublished absent any other evidence. —holly {chat} 18:34, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Whpq as no permission (No permission since). 1935 work, converting to DR for further research into PD status. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:42, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: {{PD-UK-unknown}} could work except that it wouldn't have been PD until 2005, which is later than the 1996 URAA date. —holly {chat} 18:39, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Suspected copyright violation: claimed own work 2013, but the ship was scrapped ten years earlier. MKFI (talk) 07:49, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Uploader is a long-time Commons user who appears to know the rules, so I would need some evidence of copyvio, otherwise we can assume that this was photo in their archives that was scanned for Commons. —holly {chat} 18:45, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ellywa as no permission (No permission since). Vysotsky (talk) 09:12, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Most likely copyright was transferred to the commissioner of this painting (Dutch government). I will enquire with RVD (Rijksvoorlichtingsdienst). Vysotsky (talk) 09:14, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Comment See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Collectie Fotocollectie Rijksvoorlichtingsdienst Eigen, fotonummer 156-0480, Bestanddeelnr 156-0480.jpg (with further discussion). --Rosenzweig τ 10:36, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- If the CC license is from the website, we generally rely on the legal acumen of the state agency releasing the image, if they withdraw the license, so do we. --RAN (talk) 05:11, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: found the original image at [13], where CC0 is indicated. —holly {chat} 18:52, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
File:Collectie Fotocollectie Rijksvoorlichtingsdienst Eigen, fotonummer 156-0480, Bestanddeelnr 156-0480.jpg
[edit]
This file was initially tagged by Ellywa as no permission (No permission since) Vysotsky (talk) 09:14, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Most likely copyright was transferred to the commissioner of this painting (Dutch government). I will enquire with RVD (Rijksvoorlichtingsdienst). Vysotsky (talk) 09:15, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Vysotsky: And if the copyright had indeed been transferred to the Dutch state, would that painting then be under some kind of free license? If so, which one, how and why? The painter died in 1975, so his works are still protected in the Netherlands until the end of 2045 per the usual 70 years pma formula. In the US, this 1956 painting is protected until the end of 2052. --Rosenzweig τ 10:33, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Comment See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Inauguration Portrait of Queen Juliana of Netherlands.jpeg. --Rosenzweig τ 10:35, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- If the CC license is from the website, we generally rely on the legal acumen of the state agency releasing the image, if they withdraw the license, so do we. --RAN (talk) 05:11, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
- In this particular case the present CC license from the website can not be found, or at least I haven't found it. It seems to be temporarily offline. I did found a low resolution image, which I added to the documentation on 7 april 2023, see here.
- Now in a new search I did found several other higher resolution images, see [14]; [15]; [16]; and [17]. Also the initial photo-shot tool place in the "ministerie van Overzeese Rijksdelen" (see here), and apparently the painting ended up at the "Kantoor voor Voorlichting en Radio Omroep Nederlands Nieuw Guinea" (Office for Information and Radio Broadcasting Dutch New Guinea).
- As to the comments by Vysotsky and Rosenzweig. They seem to foresee only two options: the copyright was released or not. And depending on this it is go or no-go. Yet I wonder: was it not just regular in those days, that in the process a publicity photo was released to the press with permission by the artist. The artist gave permission for just this one publicity picture to be distributed. We, the RKD, and current copyright-owners can leave it with that and uphold that that permission still stands..!? This would mean that even with a no-copyright transfer, we can still keep hosting the image. It does mean that we cannot take a new picture if we know where the painting is now. -- Mdd (talk) 00:58, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Found this image at [18] where CC0 is indicated. —holly {chat} 18:51, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Duplicate of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coat_of_arms_of_Peter_Chung_Soon-taick.svg, delete at the request of original uploader. GiovanniYosh12 (talk) 11:05, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 18:53, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
重复的衍生作品，原图像 File:PLAHuaihai.jpg 颐园居 (talk) 12:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: It's a crop, not a duplicate, we can keep both. --Abzeronow (talk) 18:41, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
"Az oldalon található cikkek, fotók és videók szabadon felhasználhatóak a forrás feltüntetésével." Ez szerepel az impresszumban. Itt nincs szó arról, hogy szabadon módosíthatóak a képek, így ezek inkább a Cc-by-Sa-ND (ami No Derivative Works), így ez nem használható engedély nélkül a Commonson. Hungarikusz Firkász (talk) 13:04, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- The decision is dated December 2021. → Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2021/12#MLSZ.hu --FootyBystander (talk) 20:10, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Deriative works are allowed. --Abzeronow (talk) 18:45, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Does not apply for deminimis as the main subject is the object. Bedivere (talk) 15:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Es un juguete que tengo en casa y consideré útil subir una foto para que se vea el tamaño y cómo es el juguete. Si quieren una nueva imagen, podría tomarla. ChuchoVCJMuzik (talk) 15:55, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- El problema es que el juguete tiene derechos de autor vigentes. Que lo fotografíes no te hace dueño de sus derechos de autor Bedivere (talk) 16:09, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. COM:TOYS, the toy is the subject of the photograph. --Abzeronow (talk) 18:46, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Own work? 186.173.79.57 12:20, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, it is taken from a private group photo, taken at a congress in Bariloche Argentina (year 1996). Sergio Perez PEÑ (talk) 14:33, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —holly {chat} 19:37, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Quiero borrar esta foto y todos los archivos que subí, oportunamente, a la Wikipedia.
"Quiero borrar esta foto y todos los archivos que subí a la Wikipedia" per uploader's other actions the day he filed an incomplete deletion request for this file; keep per Commons:Deletion requests/File:S31ARASalta.jpg and Commons:Deletion_requests/File:BNMP.jpg — Jeff G. ツ 02:29, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
- Keep per Commons:Deletion requests/File:S31ARASalta.jpg and Commons:Deletion_requests/File:BNMP.jpg. MKFI (talk) 18:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Jeff G. as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Photo is still copyrighted by L & L van Ginderen 29 June 1981 per Conway’s All the world’s fighting ships 1947–1995 per this edit by Pibwl.
Old file in use in several projects. Converting to DR for discussion. Abzeronow (talk) 15:36, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Not convinced I don't think it was a copyvio cited by Jeff, rather the uploader requested images he'd licensed deleted. Original photo had a watermark with Colonel Martin Otero, which corresponds to the uploader. The date was given as 1980, which corresponds with the ship commissioning. WCMemail 16:21, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Delete as nominator. @Pibwl, Abzeronow, and Wee Curry Monster: Do you have access to Conway’s "All the world’s fighting ships 1947–1995" online? — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:23, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think so. I can upload a scan somewhere (not here :) It would be a pity to delete this photo, but the caption in Conway's says like I wrote. Pibwl (talk) 18:45, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
- Comment There's evidence of other photos by L & L van Ginderen in that book. http://www.navsource.org/archives/11/05256.htm Abzeronow (talk) 16:00, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think so. I can upload a scan somewhere (not here :) It would be a pity to delete this photo, but the caption in Conway's says like I wrote. Pibwl (talk) 18:45, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 19:41, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
djvu file seems corrupted and does not render images correctly PWidergren (talk) 16:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Comment This may be a bug in creating thumbnails, not the file itself. Yann (talk) 10:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; happy to do this as a courtesy deletion. —holly {chat} 19:43, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
nekvalitní fotografie/výřez Jindřich Rubeš (talk) 16:43, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Poté co jsem našel kvalitnější fotografii myslím, že je možné tento nekvalitní výřez smazat. Ještě navrhuji na smazání tento soubor. Tschechische Länder (talk) 18:07, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 19:45, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
There is a SVG version at File:Montenegro presidental elections 2nd round.svg Ђидо (talk) 16:44, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep These are not duplicates, as they have different file types—one is a raster (.png) and one is a vector (.svg). As such, these are not quite redundant files, and they should each be kept as alternative versions of one another. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:47, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —holly {chat} 19:45, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ost316 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Uploaded by a different user than the one tagged as author. Description states it's an "Old Chinese print", which potentially indicates a different author from tagged or uploaded Yann (talk) 20:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Per {{PD-China-expired}}. This picture was published in 1914~1918 [19]. SCP-2000 03:04, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- Do you know the artist? Yann (talk) 07:27, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- It seems that the artist is anonymous. SCP-2000 14:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
- Do you know the artist? Yann (talk) 07:27, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: License, source, author, and date fixed. --Yann (talk) 14:49, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by HapHaxion as no permission (No permission since). COM:TOO? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:40, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Should be marked Template:PD-textlogo and kept. It is not very complex in design. Welkend (talk) 17:29, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
- Comment @Kruusamägi: do you know estonian law? would it be ok under COM:TOO? Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 14:16, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. COM:Estonia does not specify a level of originality. To determine whether a design is below TOO is always a bit subjective. Imho this image is showing a creativity of the designer and it is therefore copyrighted. The image has to be deleted as a consequence. --Ellywa (talk) 22:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ost316 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Uploaded by a different user than the one tagged as author. Description states it's an "Old Chinese print", which potentially indicates a different author from tagged or uploaded Yann (talk) 20:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Weak keep I'm not an art historian by any means, but this looks like it could be mid-to-late Qing dynasty art, so {{PD-China-expired}} probably applies. I would, however, prefer it if we could get a better source. @Benjamin Trovato: Do you have any recollection as this upload? —holly {chat} 19:58, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. The uploader did not give sufficient evidence that the file is in the public domain or that the copyright owner has released it under a suitable licence, per COM:EVID. Therefore the file has to be deleted. --Ellywa (talk) 22:01, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ost316 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Uploaded by a different user than the one tagged as author. Description states it's an "Old Chinese print", which potentially indicates a different author from tagged or uploaded Yann (talk) 20:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Weak keep Similar style of File:ROTR-LiuBei-GuanYu-ZhangFei.jpg, which was published in 1914~1918. I would like to assume this picture was published in same period of time. SCP-2000 03:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. The uploader did not give sufficient evidence that the file is in the public domain or that the copyright owner has released it under a suitable licence, per COM:EVID. Therefore the file has to be deleted. --Ellywa (talk) 22:01, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ost316 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Uploaded by a different user than the one tagged as author. Description states it's an "Old Chinese print", which potentially indicates a different author from tagged or uploaded Yann (talk) 20:13, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
- Weak keep Similar style of File:ROTR-LiuBei-GuanYu-ZhangFei.jpg, which was published in 1914~1918. I would like to assume this picture was published in same period of time. SCP-2000 03:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. The uploader did not give sufficient evidence that the file is in the public domain or that the copyright owner has released it under a suitable licence, per COM:EVID. Therefore the file has to be deleted. --Ellywa (talk) 22:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
