Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2023/06/20
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
I realized it is bad for my privacy Wikieditspectrum (talk) 18:42, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 05:58, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
it's the duplicate of File:Videomaster colour cartridge (04).jpg Arosio Stefano (talk) 12:53, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 14:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
J’ai téléversé ce fichier par erreur Flor WMCH (talk) 13:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 14:05, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
J’ai téléversé ce fichier par erreur Flor WMCH (talk) 15:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload (file itself first deleted by User:Túrelio as a duplicate, now deleting the redirect as well). -- Rama (talk) 15:39, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
J’ai téléversé ce fichier par erreur Flor WMCH (talk) 15:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. -- Rama (talk) 15:38, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation. Image clearly taken from campaign website and there's no evidence that the uploader is the photograph's author. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violation, found elsewhere on the web and unlikely to be own work (F1). --Эlcobbola talk 19:37, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
duplicate Neweditor1017 (talk) 20:02, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 20:08, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
This is a derivative work: it uses a photo of a copyrighted monument that is probably one of the deleted ones at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Monument des Héros Nationaux (Ouagadougou). Burkina Faso does not permit commercial freedom of panorama. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, collage includes non-free deleted. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:51, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image
ℳaʐbeʟ (✉︎) 02:56, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- These pictures are all license-free and none and one unprotected picture I have to speak to again because the authors are in there. Abby1097 (talk) 03:03, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- There it is
- Free license
- file:///home/chronos/u-61ecd3daafb529b104a1736f6de663192548da75/MyFiles/Downloads/Lizenzfreie%20Bilder/Free%20Photo%20_%20Free%20photo%20teenage%20at%20home.mhtml Abby1097 (talk) 03:26, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Kea is my little sister that I photographed so I can then do whatever I want because it's my photo Abby1097 (talk) 03:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:16, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
COM:NOTHOST - unused personal drawings with no educational utility uploaded by xwiki disruption sock
- File:Zeichnung vom Logo.jpg
- File:Pencil drawing from your owen hand.jpg
- File:Meine erste Hobby Zeichnung.jpg
Эlcobbola talk 16:18, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 17:53, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
High quality photo with no exif, only upload of user. PCP Gbawden (talk) 07:29, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Version seen on Facebook in 2014, 8 years before the uploader's claimed date of the photo. [1]. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:09, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
mistakenly uploaded Jyotsna Nag (talk) 15:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 06:45, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Copyvio . 181.43.4.96 18:58, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Red-tailed hawk. --Rosenzweig τ 06:44, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Copyvio . 181.43.4.96 18:59, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Red-tailed hawk. --Rosenzweig τ 06:44, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Copyvio . 181.43.4.96 18:59, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Red-tailed hawk. --Rosenzweig τ 06:44, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Copyvio . 181.43.4.96 19:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Red-tailed hawk. --Rosenzweig τ 06:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Copyvio . 181.43.4.96 19:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Red-tailed hawk. --Rosenzweig τ 06:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
duplicate; error in metadata Neweditor1017 (talk) 20:25, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 06:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake FELIPE GABRYEL 23 (talk) 22:35, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 06:41, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by AntiCompositeBot as no license (User:AntiCompositeBot/NoLicense/tag). User simply used a wrong license tag, this bot simply didn't recognise the minor error. -- Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:22, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Comment, René added "{{self|cc-sa-4.0}}" which likely is intended to be the Creative Commons ShareAlike 4.0 license, but due to an error it doesn't display. To avoid getting speedy deleted I'm trying to look for the correct intended license. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:26, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Done, Fixed it. So now I'm (non-admin) closing this Deletion Request (DR). --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
"(non-admin closure)" Kept: Problem solved. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 23:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by AntiCompositeBot as no license (User:AntiCompositeBot/NoLicense/tag) Richard Huber (talk) 10:07, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Die geforderten Ergänzungen wurden nachgereicht.Richard Huber (talk) 10:08, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: problem resolved. --Rosenzweig τ 10:04, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
It is not work of the user and taken from here https://www.facebook.com/natelashvilishalva/photos/d41d8cd9/1288228597856962/?paipv=0&eav=AfYJYfkxRfEn6tk9PhDV9hc8GbbaLNNzGyNkVsQ2yyOqEADxIRSJkcCFyICDdebVS6U&_rdr FlorianH76 (talk) 23:04, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 10:20, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Doubtful license. The file doesn't have a source and author. FlorianH76 (talk) 23:19, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 10:18, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation 79.40.103.80 17:52, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Comment It's unclear to me whether this passes COM:TOO France or not. I hope the deletion or keep statement by the closing admin addresses that and is not just "Already deleted by [name]." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:48, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. The website says: "# Icons: CC BY 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)". Ruthven (msg) 09:05, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation 79.40.103.80 18:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Speedy keep per COM:TOO Italy and COM:INUSE. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:46, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: {{PD-textlogo}}. Ruthven (msg) 09:04, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
duplicated with https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=133329798 Pikiwiki - Israel free image collection project (talk) 08:03, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: deleted the other. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:44, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
duplicated with https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=133329706 Pikiwiki - Israel free image collection project (talk) 08:04, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: deleted the other one. we normally keep the older uploads. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:44, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
duplicated with File:96225 buns PikiWiki Israel.jpg Pikiwiki - Israel free image collection project (talk) 08:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: deleted the other one. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:35, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Copyrighted photo from Facebook Urang Kamang (talk) 23:36, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, obvious copyvio. --Rosenzweig τ 06:18, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Per COM:FOP Slovenia: no evidence this image is in the public domain; seems modern. TadejM (t/p) 00:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:11, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Violation of artist's copyright. Jordan does not have freedom of panorama legal right. The author of the sculpture, as per this site, is Vincenzo Bianchi.
- File:At Nibo.JPG
- File:Jo-nebo-jubil.jpg
- File:Jordan 2021 P063 Mount Nebo Pope Paul II Monument.jpg
- File:Jordan 2021 P064 Mount Nebo Pope Paul II Monument.jpg
- File:Jordan 2021 P065 Mount Nebo Pope Paul II Monument.jpg
- File:Jordan 2021 P066 Mount Nebo Pope Paul II Monument.jpg
- File:Jordan 2021 P067 Mount Nebo Pope Paul II Monument.jpg
- File:Jordan 2021 P068 Mount Nebo Pope Paul II Monument.jpg
- File:Jordan, Mount NEBO, Monument in honour Pope Paul II (Jubilaeum 2000 A.D.) (detail 1).jpg
- File:Jordan, Mount NEBO, Monument in honour Pope Paul II (Jubilaeum 2000 A.D.) (detail 2).jpg
- File:Jordan, Mount NEBO, Monument in honour Pope Paul II (Jubilaeum 2000 A.D.).jpg
- File:Jordan. Mount NEBO. Monument in honour Pope Paul II (Jubilaeum 2000 A.D.) (detail 5) DSCN1249.jpg
- File:Jordanien-Berg Nebo-02-Denkmal Papst Paul II-2010-gje.jpg
- File:Jordanien-Berg Nebo-04-Denkmal Papst Paul II-2010-gje.jpg
- File:Mount Nebo Memorial of John Paul's Visit.jpg
- File:Mount nebo memorial sculpture.jpg
- File:Mount Nebo-5.JPG
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:44, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Likely COM:NETCOPYVIO: Low resolution, no EXIF, uploader uploads nothing but copyvios. Wcam (talk) 02:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:11, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
no FoP in Burkina Faso 2A02:908:122:55C0:468A:5BFF:FECC:62BA 02:31, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Hi! This is my own work. What do you mean by "no FoP Burkina Faso"? EKokou (talk) 02:56, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- COM:FOP Burkina Faso. This is a picture of a recently erected sculpture, Burkinabe law allows taking such pictures only for noncommercial purposes, which is not acceptable for Commons. -- 2A02:908:122:55C0:468A:5BFF:FECC:62BA 03:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
no FoP in Burkina Faso 2A02:908:122:55C0:468A:5BFF:FECC:62BA 02:31, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
no FoP in Burkina Faso 2A02:908:122:55C0:468A:5BFF:FECC:62BA 02:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Random penis photo, nothing special, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 02:40, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Random penis photo, nothing special, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 02:40, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo, above COM:TOO A1Cafel (talk) 04:53, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:27, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 04:54, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:11, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No FoP for 3D works in Argentina A1Cafel (talk) 04:56, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:11, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in France A1Cafel (talk) 05:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:11, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted trophy A1Cafel (talk) 05:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:27, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Mozambique A1Cafel (talk) 05:04, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:11, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Mozambique A1Cafel (talk) 05:04, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:11, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Burkina Faso A1Cafel (talk) 05:07, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:27, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Burkina Faso A1Cafel (talk) 05:08, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:11, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Blurry and unused photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 06:35, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Delete per nom. We have multiple in-focus photos of same event. Bad quality photo without compensating uniqueness nor importance. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:54, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:27, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Saudi Arabia A1Cafel (talk) 06:42, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:11, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 06:55, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:28, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 07:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. While the general concept of teddy bears is out of copyright, image search shows this design with spotted hat and claws is a modern version "Fclues", copyrightable variation. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:59, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:28, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Unboxholics Official Fan Club (talk) 07:02, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no reason. --Krd 04:28, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Unboxholics Official Fan Club (talk) 07:05, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no reason. --Krd 04:28, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 07:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 07:07, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 07:07, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 07:07, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Unboxholics Official Fan Club (talk) 07:08, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no reason. --Krd 04:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 07:09, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Unboxholics Official Fan Club (talk) 07:10, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no reason. --Krd 04:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 07:16, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:30, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 07:17, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 07:17, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
The arch was completed in 1936 by Petre Antonescu (1873–1965), there is no freedom of panorama in Romania. The copyright terms of the country lasted for 70 years, thus they can be undeleted in 2036. A1Cafel (talk) 07:30, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in New Caledonia (France) A1Cafel (talk) 07:43, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Italy A1Cafel (talk) 07:48, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Italy A1Cafel (talk) 07:49, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
PLUS UTILE Lope sousmise (talk) 12:41, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Delete not categorized, unused, likely out of scope. Ankry (talk) 00:53, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Delete. See also Ticket:2023062010006751. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:50, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:30, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Behzadsh85 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Per COM:IRAN, banknotes after after 21 March 1992 are not free
- File:100 Posht.jpg
- File:100 haram.jpg
- File:100 ru.jpg
- File:200 p.jpg
- File:200ru.jpg
- File:100 q posht.jpg
- File:100 q ru.jpg
- File:100 abi posht.jpg
- File:100 abi ru.jpg
- File:50 p.png
- File:50 r.png
- File:50 Posht.jpg
- File:50 ru.jpg
- File:1 Posht.jpg
- File:1 ru.jpg
- File:2 Posht.jpg
- File:2 ru.jpg
- File:2r.jpg
Эlcobbola talk 14:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:30, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from background. Should be blanked to keep. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:51, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No FoP for 3D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 15:59, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:13, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No FoP for 3D works in Japan A1Cafel (talk) 16:02, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:13, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
No FoP for 3D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 16:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:13, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Photograph from http://worldcoingallery.com/countries/display_wd.php?dir=img6&image=94-160a&desc=Israel%20km160a%201%20New%20Sheqel%20(1994--)%20nickel-clad%20steel&query=Israel. World Coin Gallery has a copyright notice on its home page and its terms of use http://worldcoingallery.com/legal.html say "Except as expressly provided in these Terms of Use, no part of the Site and no Content may be copied, reproduced, republished, uploaded, posted, publicly displayed, encoded, transmitted or distributed in any way (including "mirroring") to any other computer, server, Web site or other medium for publication or distribution or for any commercial enterprise, without Worldcoingallery.com's express prior consent.". I don't see a basis for the GNU or Creative Commons license here. Abzeronow (talk) 16:45, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:13, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Copied from Facebook, Metadata has "FBMD" mark. Please upload the original files, or send a permission via COM:OTRS. ~Moheen (keep talking) 16:47, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:13, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Description notes the photograph is from World Coin Gallery http://worldcoingallery.com/countries/coin.php?image=img7/69-843&desc=France%20km843%2010%20Centimes%20(1898-1921) I don't see a basis for the license given. Abzeronow (talk) 16:49, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:13, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
File:Art installation at the Hanna Springs Sculpture Garden in Lampasas, Texas LCCN2014633163.tif
[edit]Copyvio. No freedom of panorama in the United States. Nv8200p (talk) 17:41, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:13, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 19:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:13, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
extremly small size/low resolution, not useful, given the other uploads own work unlikely Polarlys (talk) 19:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:13, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Claimed free license not seen at source website; looks over TOO Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:47, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:14, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Duplicate VSchagow (talk) 13:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, deleted and redirected to File:2009121204 Fassade Barbiergasse 11 2009.jpg. --Rosenzweig τ 07:36, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
A low quality crop of file:An ongoing cosmic collision.jpg missidentified as Mrk 876. C messier (talk) 16:48, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:33, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: fictitious flag. (Per w:User talk:Septrillion/Archive 1#Armisenia_page: "Armisenia is a micronation located in Navotas, Philippines founded by wikipedian user [name removed].") Omphalographer (talk) 19:45, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:31, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: probably fictitious flag (unclear what "Bagal" is but the description of "lol lol" certainly doesn't suggest legitimacy). Omphalographer (talk) 19:49, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:31, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: fictitious flag (file name matches username, user has no other edits) Omphalographer (talk) 19:50, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by JustHereToLeave (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope: flags, maps, and various other graphics related to a fictional country ("Durovsk"), a fictional ocean liner ("Leningrad"), and several fictional companies ("Blue Matrix Studios" and "Intercontinental Airways").
- File:Leningradrednight.png
- File:New Durovsk Flag 2.png
- File:DurovskCOA.png
- File:DurovskGlobe.png
- File:Durovskcivilflag.png
- File:Durovskflag2.png
- File:Durovskflag.png
- File:Leningradpostcard.png
- File:BlueMatrixRecords.png
- File:BlueMatrixLogo.png
- File:Intercontinental Airways Logo.png
Omphalographer (talk) 20:04, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:28, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: a poorly drawn mixture of national flags. Omphalographer (talk) 20:08, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: fictional flag Omphalographer (talk) 20:14, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: fictional flag Omphalographer (talk) 20:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: fictional flag Omphalographer (talk) 20:16, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:25, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Alejandrochezboi (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope: numerous flags and diagrams related to fictional micronations.
- File:View of Pandaria.jpg
- File:Pantonian Gouvernment Diagram.png
- File:Flag of Capynation.png
- File:Flag of Westfalia.png
- File:Flag of Shalzkotten.png
- File:Flag of Satis.png
- File:Flag of Modenshia.png
- File:Flag of Naygardia.png
- File:Flag of Annies Town.png
- File:Flag of Magrathea.jpg
- File:Flag of Culpinera.png
- File:Flag of Lenjia.png
- File:Flag of Doma.png
- File:Flag of Frankies Ville.png
- File:Flag of Yutheria.png
- File:Flag of Southern Sunny Side.png
- File:Flag of Swampington.png
- File:Flag of Spearpoint.png
- File:Flag of Northern Sunny Side.png
- File:Pantonian Coat of Arms.png
- File:Flag of Benessia.png
- File:Flag of the Republic of Pantonia.png
Omphalographer (talk) 20:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:25, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Duplication of File:Flag of Germany.svg. Fry1989 eh? 20:41, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: we have many flags of Germany in Category:National flag of Germany, we don't need an inferior webp duplicate. --Rosenzweig τ 07:20, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Uploaded by His Majesty King Sean, clear lack of notability. Copied from micronations wiki where it should have stayed. IMO we shouldn't support trolls who are dissatisfied or don't like their government and therefore call themselves King of a micronation. See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Cordoba33. Worst case were if the micronations wiki had to shut down and we'll get all the crap. Achim (talk) 12:51, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Green Giant (talk) 23:04, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope: fictional flag with no claimed significance. (Previous file is unrelated; this is a default filename used by a flag design web site.) Omphalographer (talk) 21:56, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Also deleted the PNG version File:Crontinallia Colonies Flag.png. --Rosenzweig τ 07:18, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by BeautifulKiwi (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope: fictional flags, logos, and currency related to a micronation.
- File:Iustian Environment party.jpg
- File:Iustus dollar 50.png
- File:Iustus dollar 100.png
- File:Iustus 20dollor.png
- File:Iustus 10dollor.png
- File:Iustian 1dollor.png
- File:National (1).png
- File:Monarchiest party of iustus.png
- File:Iustus Now logo.png
- File:Iustus P-C logo.png
- File:Iustian D-S party.png
- File:Iustus coat of arms.png
- File:Flag of Iustus.png
- File:Flag of Micronation Occitania 2.png
Omphalographer (talk) 22:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete all. Outside of COM:SCOPE. Marbletan (talk) 14:15, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: most, per nomination, kept two which are in use. --Rosenzweig τ 07:15, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Unboxholics Official Fan Club (talk) 06:36, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:46, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
duplicated with https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=133329802 Pikiwiki - Israel free image collection project (talk) 08:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Mdaniels5757 when processing the duplicate. --Rosenzweig τ 08:20, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
this is a clip of a Deutsche Wochenschau newsreel. While all newsreels of the Deutsche Wochenschau are PD in the US per {{PD-US-alien property}}, it is unclear whether they are in the public domain in the source country of Germany, so they should be deleted per COM:PCP 2A02:908:122:55C0:468A:5BFF:FECC:62BA 10:46, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:43, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Duplicate. The system did not recognize that it was handling existing files. VSchagow (talk) 11:14, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 07:41, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
File:2023022322 Brunnen Neustaedter Markt West und Plattenbauten Galaxy Note 8 aus RAW 2023.jpg
[edit]Duplicate. The system did not recognize that it was handling existing files. VSchagow (talk) 11:14, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:41, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
File:2023022301 Brunnen Neustaedter Markt West und Plattenbauten Galaxy Note 8 aus RAW 2023.jpg
[edit]Duplicate. The system did not recognize that it was handling existing files. VSchagow (talk) 11:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 07:40, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Duplicate. The system did not recognize that it was handling existing files. VSchagow (talk) 11:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 07:40, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Phantasy. COM:SCOPE 82.135.82.65 11:22, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Just delete it. Scottstarrs (talk) 11:39, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Did somebody's feelings get hurt? Fry1989 eh? 13:34, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy keep COM:INUSE. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:56, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: in use. --Rosenzweig τ 07:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Answer key for some exam. Outside of COM:SCOPE. Marbletan (talk) 12:29, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:38, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
copyvio. In de:WP another photographer is mentioned. Bauer Alfons (talk) 12:41, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Hi!
- I don't know, how to change the name of the photographer. So I just mentioned him (Rudolf Nachbaur) in the subtitle of the picture.
- Can I ask Hermann G. Nachbaur to send an email - like he did for the file "Brown Hare's Field"?
- Thanks! Iane Maehr (talk) 12:47, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: has a VRT permission now. --Rosenzweig τ 07:37, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Persian971 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope: fictitious flags and passport images ("Irkanland" and "House of Al Orkani"); promotional image ("Al Aweer Tours").
- File:Passport Of Irkanland.png
- File:Flag Of Irkanland.png
- File:Irkanland passport.png
- File:Orkanish language.png
- File:Al Aweer Tours- Desert Safari Dubai UAE.jpg
- File:House of Al Orkani united Arab Emirates.jpg
- File:Orkani global.jpg
Omphalographer (talk) 20:20, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:48, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: fictitious flag (description: "TAR is a new micronation") Omphalographer (talk) 20:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:49, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: fictional micronation flag (cf. https://micronations.wiki/wiki/Federal_Republic_of_Scoara) Omphalographer (talk) 20:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 07:49, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: another fictional micronation flag. (This one even got deleted from the micronations wiki for being "fantasy content".) Omphalographer (talk) 22:02, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 08:02, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 07:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Low quality personal file outside of COM:SCOPE. Marbletan (talk) 14:19, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Kadı Message 16:02, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by FELIPE GABRIEL DE SOUZA (talk · contribs)
[edit]These files related to a Brazilian football club were uploaded as "own work", but I don't think they are. Their characteristics and those of several others already deleted files by the same uploader (nominated for deletion by the uploader themselves) lead to me believe that they are either video screenshots or grabbed from somewhere on the web. So they should be deleted per the precautionary principle. If any of these are really own work as claimed, we should have a COM:VRT permission for them.
- File:TORCIDA ORGANIZADA RUBRA.jpg
- File:TORCIDA DA ANAPOLINA.jpg
- File:GRÊMIO ESPORTIVO ANÁPOLIS.jpg
- File:COPA GOIÁS.jpg
- File:Associação Atlética Anapolina 3.jpg
- File:Associação Atlética Anapolina 2.jpg
- File:Associação Atlética Anapolina SÉRIE C.png
- File:Associação Atlética Anapolina.jpg
- File:TROFÉU DA ANAPOLINA.jpg
Rosenzweig τ 06:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:04, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Al-khataei (talk · contribs)
[edit]This bunch of files seem all to be about some fictional emirate, out of project scope.
- File:PASSPORT AMA.jpg
- File:As-Siriliyyah wiki.jpg
- File:As-Siriliyyah.png
- File:Nsflag.jpg
- File:Emir.jpg
- File:Tepass.jpg
- File:Trilateral connection.jpg
- File:Nsm.png
- File:Nobles.png
- File:Banknote fic.jpg
- File:IRRA.png
Rosenzweig τ 06:21, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:04, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/https://becc.bristol.gov.uk
[edit]License is incompatible with commons - CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 at https://becc.bristol.gov.uk/records/2001/291/1/1/I-56
- File:View of Mafuga Central Forest Reserve from aeroplane, 1964.jpg
- File:Mount Elgon at 12,000 feet.jpg
- File:View of flowing river with mount Rwenzori in the background.jpg
- File:Forest nursery at Lendu.jpg
- File:A flock of Lesser Flamongo crowd the shoreline of Lake Kikorongo. South West Uganda, 1955.jpg
- File:Portal Peaks from Nyamleju on Mount Rwenzori.jpg
- File:Indian crewmen Aden 1897.jpg
Gbawden (talk) 07:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:04, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Unused personal photo. Solomon203 (talk) 12:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Agree, Delete. Only thing the user has contributed to the project since 20218 are two vanity images. Acabashi (talk) 22:11, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:10, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Unused personal photo. Solomon203 (talk) 12:19, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Agree, Delete. Only thing the user has contributed to the project since 20218 are two vanity images. Acabashi (talk) 22:11, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:10, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ishola Kowiyat Blessing (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons:What Commons is not#Wikimedia Commons is not your personal free web host. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:14, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:05, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope, portrait photo no educational purpose, is self promotion only. AxkAxk (talk) 16:40, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Looks like a personal image of a non-notable individual who has only a few contributions. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:52, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:05, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation 79.40.103.80 17:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy keep per COM:INUSE and COM:TOO Italy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:50, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Keep per Ikan Kekek. --Ruthven (msg) 09:06, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: below COM:TOO US and Italy. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 13:29, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Author's request: I uploaded a better SVG version (File:Zefiro Net logo.svg); low-quality logo; not in use. Epicamused (talk) 20:04, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:34, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
it wasn't mine, but I think deleting it would be better for me Mhatopzz (talk) 14:08, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Kept: That is not an policy-based rationale for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 16:30, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Out of scope nonsense. If the “motto” means the same thing as in Swedish, it would translate to “The unfaithful pædo man”. VulpesVulpes42 (talk) 18:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Per this Reddit thread, "Ingen" refers to a Youtube user, and the motto may be an insulting reference to an incident in his personal life. Either way, it certainly isn't a real coat of arms. Omphalographer (talk) 19:12, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:06, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Private Picture. Out of Project Scope Schlurcher (talk) 18:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:06, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Private Picture. Out of Project Scope Schlurcher (talk) 18:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:06, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Uncat. graphs not in use since 2016. Per COM:NOTUSED.
- File:Unsat case of traffic light.png
- File:Sat case of traffic light.png
- File:N-curve with two BNs.png
- File:Departure Curve for a Signal with Releasing Capacity of mius.png
- File:N-curve with n BNs.png
Onsilla (talk) 19:52, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Various images uploaded as part of the NationsGlory Minecraft roleplaying game.
- File:AsgardSignature.png
- File:TeewullSignature.png
- File:DRAPEAU OFFICIEL.png
- File:DiagrammeNationsGlory2.png
- File:DiagrammeChineNationsGlory.png
Omphalographer (talk) 20:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Duplication of File:Standard of the Salvation Army.svg. Fry1989 eh? 20:20, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
copyright image - taken from social media https://twitter.com/CUBE_PTG/status/1510959980391788544?s=20 Evaders99 (talk) 20:25, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
copyright image - taken from social media - https://twitter.com/CUBE_PTG/status/1510959980391788544?s=20 Evaders99 (talk) 20:25, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Duplication of File:Flag of Gibraltar.svg. Fry1989 eh? 20:41, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Duplication of File:Ensign of Austro-Hungarian civil fleet (1869-1918).svg. Fry1989 eh? 20:42, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Fiifiblack (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal file collection, all unused, out of scope.
- File:Arcadia Farm Photo.jpg
- File:Army Profile Picture.jpg
- File:Evans and Spouse.jpg
- File:Taken at Ft Sam Huston .jpg
- File:Profile-Picture-Virginia.png
GeorgHH • talk 23:02, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
ニトロショエブースト(Nitro Shoaiboost)本人に確認したところ、投稿者自身による著作物ではないことが判明したため。 ちくわまうてん (talk) 05:30, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 05:35, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted trophy A1Cafel (talk) 04:58, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted trophy A1Cafel (talk) 04:58, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
non-free img, artist still lives and artwork is above threshold of originality
|
Copyright warning: A subject in this image is protected by copyright.
This image features an architectural or artistic work, photographed from a public space in Italy. There is no freedom of panorama exception in the Italian copyright law, which means that they cannot be photographed freely for anything other than personal purposes. However, de minimis non curat praetor concept may be applicable. Another exception also exist for buildings which are not creative enough to attain copyright protection: see Commons:CRT/Italy#Freedom of panorama for more information. If a copyrighted architectural or artistic work is contained in this image and it is a substantial reproduction, this photo cannot be licensed under a free license, and will be deleted. Framing this image to focus on the copyrighted work is also a copyright violation. Before reusing this content, ensure that you have the right to do so. You are solely responsible for ensuring that you do not infringe someone else's copyrights. See our general disclaimer and {{Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer}} for more information. |
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpeg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_-_328_(50589673587).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_simvolları.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(16656481773).jpg){kind=link}
_and_Sara_Bernstein_(right)_at_the_2022_Tribeca_Film_Festival.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
_(detail_1).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(detail_2).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(detail_5)_DSCN1249.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpeg){kind=link}
.jpeg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_-_328_(50589673587).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_328_(50589673587).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_-_328_(50589673587).jpg){kind=link}
_-_328_(50589673587).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_simvollar%C4%B1.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_simvollar%C4%B1.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_simvolları.png){kind=link}
_simvolları.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Mateus2019 (talk) 06:46, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 21:29, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
Es eléctrico este Audi? 191.125.129.235 03:55, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: advertising, OoS. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:21, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Bonita moto, pero no es mía. 191.125.129.235 03:56, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: advertising, OoS. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:21, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
No license source Kazman322 (talk) 03:58, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:22, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Needs VRTS ticket. Similar situation as Commons:Deletion requests/File:Balazs Marton Erno.png and uploaded by same person. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 04:53, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Description said that the author was "Balazs Marton" and has permission from "Balazs Marton Erno". Insufficient source and permission. Needs COM:VRT. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:24, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Extremely small and unused image, can be replaced by many alternatives in the category A1Cafel (talk) 06:42, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:22, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
No permission from the source and the author A1Cafel (talk) 07:03, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:24, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
No permission from the source A1Cafel (talk) 07:05, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:24, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Extremely small and unused image, we had plenty photos of Elizabeth Warren A1Cafel (talk) 07:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:24, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Alakasız ve spam içerik 31.143.57.18 08:22, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:25, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
_(16656481773).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(16656481773).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Abbildung eines touristischen Prospekts oder einer Schautafel, die ziemlich sicher nicht unter einer freien Lizenz steht Lu-xin (talk) 08:25, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
_(16656481773).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination, DW. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:25, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
_(16656481773).jpg){kind=link}
Duplikat VSchagow (talk) 09:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, duplicate of File:2021082504 Woehlerstrasse 6 Zentralperspektive 2021.jpg. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:47, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
It's my photo and I want to delete it Justupdater (talk) 17:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy keep COM:INUSE. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:22, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
- Is it your own work or a screenshot? 181.43.3.228 21:04, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Kadı Message 13:52, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Is screenshot of your own work? 191.126.38.245 09:29, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, screenshot per metadata. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:26, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Diese Bild gibt es doppelt. Hier die andere Datei: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kunstaktion_%22auch_in_Berlin%22_im_Gesundbrunnen.jpg Berlinschneid (talk) 09:35, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:46, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Picture from their official website https://decumbare.com.ar/ CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:27, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Vidic languages (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope: Fiction.
Enyavar (talk) 10:29, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, no meaningful use. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:28, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
The file is broken and is missing 4 pages. A replacement scan was uploaded to File:Bismarck and the Foundation of the German Empire (1899).djvu. It (and all previous versions) is of no use anymore. Ciridae (talk) 12:52, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, superseded. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:29, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Logo of a not yet existing soccer club, which doesn't serve any educational value. Article about the club was speedy deleted on nlwiki. Mbch331 (talk) 13:53, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:30, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
personal photo without educational use. Not notable blogger Drakosh (talk) 13:58, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:30, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
improperly licensed logo 331dot (talk) 14:58, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Can you please explain why it's improperly licensed? Mileslong123 (talk) 15:09, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. The only thing I see that's incorrect here is that this file should be tagged as {{PD-textlogo}}; it's well below the threshold of originality. Omphalographer (talk) 19:17, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Question Is Symbiant notable? What does it do and where is it headquartered? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:54, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- According to https://www.symbiant.co.uk/, it's a piece of corporate risk management software. Notability is a little hazy (as seen at en:Draft:Symbiant Company), but that's a Wikipedia problem. Omphalographer (talk) 08:02, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. The UK has such strict COM:TOO that this might be over it. Also, notability is not just a "Wikipedia problem." Commons doesn't have to have as strict a policy as Wikipedia, but it does not host the logo of every company that's ever existed, so some degree of notability is needed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:17, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: no educational value, out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:45, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
unused selfie Jochen Burghardt (talk) 15:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:31, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Advice outside of COM:SCOPE. Even if this text were to be needed anywhere on a Wikimedia project, it should be text on that project not a JPG on Commons. Marbletan (talk) 15:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:31, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Duplicate and identical file PancoPinco (talk) 16:09, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, duplicate of File:Raimundo de Madrazo - Clotilde, Marquessa de Acricollar.jpg. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:43, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Copyright infringement: taken from a copyrighted source (magazine) MrMisterer (talk) 16:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:43, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Fehllizenzierung durch Patricia Fröhlich als "Eigenes Werk" Urheber ist jedoch Patrick Slesiona Lutheraner (talk) 16:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:42, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
unused personal art with no educational use Clarinetguy097 (talk) 16:19, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:33, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lambang_GMIM.png Michel Ticoalu (talk) 16:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lambang_GMIM.png Michel Ticoalu (talk) 16:33, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: unused logo, above TOO. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:41, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Madhusahan Wijewardhana (talk · contribs)
[edit]Collection of photos, presumably from third parties (low resolution/size, partly missing EXIF, partly implausible EXIF information, cameras range from Hasselblad to Nikon and Canon), historical photos, everything with an own work claim
- File:BIA is the hub of Sri Lankan Airlines.jpg
- File:Bandaranaike International Airport Main Building.jpg
- File:War hero Memorial.jpg
- File:P. de. S. Kularatne.jpg
- File:Flag of Nalanda College.jpg
- File:Malalasekara Theater of Nalanda College.jpg
- File:Jinendradasa Hall.jpg
- File:Oldest buildings of Nalanda College.jpg
- File:SCH-880 Sri Lanka Air Force C130H.jpg
- File:CJ-712 BAC Jet Provost.jpg
- File:DHC-1 Chipmunk.png
- File:Sri Lanka Airforce Boulton Paul Balliol History.jpg
- File:Crest of KDU.png
- File:KDU flag.jpg
- File:LPG operations.jpg
- File:Hambantota International Port in 2020.jpg
- File:A330-300 Business Class.jpg
- File:4R-ANC A321-251N.jpg
- File:4R-MVS Air Senok AS350.jpg
- File:4R-EXR A320-232 of Fitsair with new livery.jpg
Polarlys (talk) 19:17, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete all unless true source and proof of free license is shown. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Kept the flag as PD-simple. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:07, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Madhusahan Wijewardhana (talk · contribs)
[edit]See above thread, multiple sizes, no exif. doubtful own work.
- File:SLAF Mig27,Kfir,F7.jpg
- File:SLAF Bell 412ep.jpg
- File:SLAF Mi 24.jpg
- File:SLAF F7 Skybolt.jpg
- File:SLAF Mig 27.jpg
- File:SLAF IAI Kfir C2.jpg
- File:Air Traffic Control Tower of BIA.jpg
- File:Entrance of KDU (from inside).jpg
- File:Entrance of KDU.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
--Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:08, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
- File:SLAF Mig27,Kfir,F7.jpg is credited in press to Sri Lanka Air Force, which has a copy here with a copyright notice.
- File:SLAF Bell 412ep.jpg — not found
- File:SLAF Mi 24.jpg is here, copyright Hans Rolink.
- File:SLAF F7 Skybolt.jpg — also found on Sri Lanka Air Force, which has a copy wallpapers page
- File:SLAF Mig 27.jpg — not found
- File:SLAF IAI Kfir C2.jpg — photo credited to Key Aero Key Aero version here
- File:Air Traffic Control Tower of BIA.jpg — Getty Images
Speedy delete - File:Entrance of KDU (from inside).jpg — not found
- File:Entrance of KDU.jpg — found on Facebook not sure if this is original source
- Delete in general, unless better information provided. The Getty one should be dealt with speedily. —Tcr25 (talk) 15:40, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:34, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Nothing to see Antvaset (talk) 19:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, OoS. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:35, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Nothing to see Antvaset (talk) 19:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, OoS. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:35, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
no encyclopedic use Darrelljon (talk) 20:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:36, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
no encyclopedic use Darrelljon (talk) 20:26, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I don't disagree that the file should be deleted, but your considering Commons solely at the service of Wikipedia is objectionable, false, and ignores uses outside of encyclopedias. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Yeah, he should have said "no educational use" instead. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 16:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Exactly. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:28, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:37, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
No indication of claimed free license seen at source web page (neither current nor archived); IMO clearly well over TOO. Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:42, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:37, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
_and_Sara_Bernstein_(right)_at_the_2022_Tribeca_Film_Festival.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_and_Sara_Bernstein_(right)_at_the_2022_Tribeca_Film_Festival.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Claimed as the work up the uploader, but photo data says ABC took the image 331dot (talk) 22:10, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:39, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
screenshot of copyrighted game, not own work Bultro (talk) 22:56, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:38, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Thalkirchen
[edit]Creator is Ricarda Dietz, how is still alive. Her art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
- File:Munich Nov 2020 13 11 18 809000.jpeg
- File:Ricarda Dietz Elephant in Thalkirchen.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Thalkirchen Linie U3 München.JPG
- File:U-Bahnhof Thalkirchen U3 München 1.JPG
Lukas Beck (talk) 14:03, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Frist three files: missing permission for shown artwork, no COM:DM; FoP disputed, see Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Germany#Public -> COM:PCP; Kept last "File:U-Bahnhof Thalkirchen U3 München 1.JPG" considered as de minimis (guideline #4). --Wdwd (talk) 16:20, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
The station was built in 1999. This art is unfree until at ealiest 2070. This art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Missing permission for shown artwork; FoP disputed, see notes and literature in Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Germany#Public -> Deleted per COM:PCP. --Wdwd (talk) 18:04, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Innsbrucker Ring
[edit]The station was built in 1980. This art is unfree until at earliest 2051. This art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
Lukas Beck (talk) 16:33, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Missing permission for shown artwork; FoP disputed, see notes and literature in Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Germany#Public -> Deleted per COM:PCP. --Wdwd (talk) 18:07, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
The station was built in 1979. This art is unfree until at earliest 2049. This art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
- File:Engelbertbrunnen.jpeg
- File:Stadtbahn Bochum Bermuda3eck 1902191546.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Bochum Bermuda3eck 1902191547.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Bochum Bermuda3eck 1902191548.jpg
- File:Straßenbahn Bochum 308 536 Bermuda3eck 190219.jpg
Lukas Beck (talk) 17:04, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: first four files: missing permission for shown artworks; FoP disputed, see notes and literature in Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Germany#Public -> Deleted per COM:PCP; Kept "File:Straßenbahn Bochum 308 536 Bermuda3eck 190219.jpg" per COM:DM (#4). --Wdwd (talk) 17:57, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Creator is Leo Janischowsky, how is still alive. His art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either. Lukas Beck (talk) 17:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Missing permission for shown artwork; FoP disputed, see notes and literature in Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Germany#Public -> Deleted per COM:PCP. --Wdwd (talk) 17:51, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Appears to be a TV screenshot, unlikely to be own work Adeletron 3030 (talk) 14:55, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 18:25, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Footypassion (talk · contribs)
[edit]Bogus CC licenses - images elsewhere before upload (e.g., File:Petter.Skogsletten.jpg is here; File:Skogsletten official FC Roskilde photo.jpg is here; File:Skogsletten FC Nordsjælland.jpg is here). Uploader does not even claim the latter two to be their work (both sources are "FC Nordsjælland" with authors "Patrick Werther" and "Viktor Sivert" (the subject credits File:Skogsletten official FC Roskilde photo.jpg to "FC Roskilde") and EXIF for File:Petter.Skogsletten.jpg credits "Fotograf Alf Simensen". Evidence of permission for all three disparate authors needed.
- File:Skogsletten FC Nordsjælland.jpg
- File:Skogsletten official FC Roskilde photo.jpg
- File:Petter.Skogsletten.jpg
Эlcobbola talk 15:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- First photo being FC Roskilde, and second photo from FC Nordsjælland. Both legal to use. Footypassion (talk) 16:14, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, missing permission. --Wdwd (talk) 18:29, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
Suspected copyright violation: small resolution image of a TV presenter, possibly video screencap. MKFI (talk) 10:43, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:07, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Dubious claim of own work. Professional type photos with no exif - i think we need OTRS. Its worth noting that a similar upload by this user was taken from FB. PCP
Gbawden (talk) 13:12, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:07, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
File:Rahm Emanuel, Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Brad Pitt at 'Bullet Train' event at Tokyo Station 2022-08-23.jpg
[edit]
If the US Embassy in Japan uses a photo in Twitter does it mean that the photo was made by a US government official? Very large interpretation. Imagine an actress visits the Embassy, her assistant takes pictures because the actress believes she is the person to take her best poses. Then they send a copy to the Embassy and the Embassy publishes it in Twitter... Or because Wikipedia is American always make things easier for gringos. 181.43.4.96 13:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, could you provide the source for the photograph? You know the embassy has its own photographer too, right? And this particular shot was orchestrated by Rahm Emanuel, who's all about evangelizing for the Japanese rail system and promoting the PASMO card. Also, I'm not a gringo, not that my ethnicity should matter here. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 14:47, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know you. I speak of principles. 181.43.4.96 14:57, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy keep Nominator does not seem willing to provide a valid reason for deletion. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 01:50, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, tweets from an US Embassy are public domain if they are made by a government employee in the course of their duties. This photograph is by a government employee so Keep Abzeronow (talk) 15:32, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Who said anything against it? (Your first sentence) How do you know who is a USG employee? (Your second sentence) Mr Biden? 181.43.4.96 12:33, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Your first sentence expressed doubt that tweets from a US Embassy is public domain. Social media doesn't automatically give US government works a copyright. Second, let's read the Tweet "Guess who I ran into at #tokyostation? #BradPitt & Aaron Taylor-Johnson on their way to Kyoto 4 the 🇯🇵 premiere of #BulletTrainMovie-the No 1 movie! From one train enthusiast to another.". It's written as if Rahm Emanuel was the author of the tweet, but he probably didn't, a low level government employee of the Embassy probably did. As mentioned above, the Embassy has its own photographer and I really doubt the Embassy would use the photograph of some random passerby so Occam's Razor would have us believe that a government employee took the photograph. Abzeronow (talk) 15:58, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- Who said anything against it? (Your first sentence) How do you know who is a USG employee? (Your second sentence) Mr Biden? 181.43.4.96 12:33, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:07, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Although the creator of this extracted image is indicates that FOP-China applies, it is a fact that the original photo was taken in a mall in Hong Kong. Hong Kong is a separate administrative territory within China with their own set of copyright laws, of which provisions related to FoP does not include 2d images. Robertsky (talk) 14:30, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete This image is patently not extracted from the source picture despite the declaration. 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 11:48, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete And I'm wondering if the source picture should be nominated too. Teetrition (talk) 09:02, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:07, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Picture from Pinterest CoffeeEngineer (talk) 19:42, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:45, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
COM:DW, photo of artwork not known to be free license. Also applies to derivative File:City of Morristown Seal.png Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:48, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:30, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Photo is an old photo from 2011 when we already have one from 2023. Also this one is laggy and the copyright status is assumed, so it might be copyrighted CubanoBoi (talk) 22:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Comment This photo is COM:INUSE. Please link the other photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:37, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Still, the copyright status is assumed. On the source it doesn’t say it. The other photo is File:ESBU Wilfredo Cabrera Portal.jpg CubanoBoi (talk) 22:48, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I understand. Thanks for linking the other photo. If there's no copyright problem with this photo, it has to be kept per COM:INUSE. The other photo is a bigger file, but whether it's of higher quality is very debatable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:20, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
- EcuRed doesn't list a copyright tag, so we don't know if the author wants it to be copyrighted. CubanoBoi (talk) 14:17, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
- If there's no CC license there, it should presumably be assumed to be copyright, all rights reserved and deleted per COM:PCP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:52, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
- Delete due to the lack of information regarding copyright. I replaced the older 2011 file with the new 2023 file so COM:INUSE no longer applies. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:51, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:29, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Böhmerwaldplatz
[edit]The station was built in 1988. This art is unfree until at earliest 2059. This art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
- File:Munich U-Bahn Boehmerwaldplatz.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Böhmerwaldplatz2.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Böhmerwaldplatz6.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Böhmerwaldplatz7.jpg
Lukas Beck (talk) 16:54, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:43, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The station was built in 1984. This art is unfree until at earliest 2055. This art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either. Lukas Beck (talk) 17:09, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:43, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Dortmund Hauptbahnhof
[edit]The station was built in 1984. This art is unfree until at earliest 2055. This art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
- File:Dortmund Hbf 2018 09 24 IMG 7972.JPG
- File:Dortmund Hbf 2018 09 24 IMG 7973.JPG
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 1709170935.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 1709170936.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 1709170937.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 1709170939.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 171201.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 1903231809.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 1903231810.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 2005290822.jpg
Lukas Beck (talk) 17:12, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Oppose The images had become historic. The station was completely rebuild and renovated. JWBE (talk) 21:07, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Become historic? I don't get it? Are these works of art older than 70 years. Can't believe that, sorry! Lukas Beck (talk) 05:09, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Siehe Diskussionsseite. --Clic (talk) 08:39, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:43, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Dortmund Hauptbahnhof
[edit]German freedom of panorama does only applies for permanently installed works.
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 2005290818.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 2005290819.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 2005290821.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 2005290828.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 2005290829.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn Dortmund Hauptbahnhof 2005290830.jpg
Lukas Beck (talk) 17:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose The images had become historic. The station was completely rebuild and renovated. JWBE (talk) 21:08, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Become historic? I don't get it? Are these works of art older than 70 years. Can't believe that, sorry! Lukas Beck (talk) 05:09, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Siehe Diskussionsseite. --Clic (talk) 08:39, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
The following was moved from the talk page where it does not belong: "== Keine Löschung der Fotos ==
Diese Fotos dokumentieren den Fortschritt der Bauarbeiten im U-Bahnhof Dortmund Hauptbahnhof. Hier geht es nicht um Abbildung schützenswerter Kunst. Die Bilder zeigen Bautrennwände, Absperrungen und Hinweise, die vom Bauherren DSW21 "ansprechend" gestaltet wurden. Clic (talk) 07:05, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Die gezeigten Kunstwerke erreichen ziemlich eindeutig die Schöpfungshöhe, weil sie aus mehr als nur einfachen Formen bestehen. Ich kann mich nur dahingehend wiederholen, dass die deutsche Panoramafreiheit auch für öffentliche Innenräume nicht gültig ist. Unabhängig davon bezieht sich ein Teil des Löschantrages wie von dir richtig erkannt auf Kunst auf Bautrennwände und Absperrungen. Diese befinden sich normalerweise nicht dauerhaft an einem Ort und sind damit auch nicht von der Panoramafreiheit gedeckt. Gruß Lukas Beck (talk) 07:24, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Ich habe mit den Dortmunder Stadtwerken DSW21, als Betreiber dieser U-Bahnstation und Verantwortlicher für die Bauarbeiten und deren Beschilderung, Kontakt aufgenommen, mit Link auf Fotos und diesen Löschantrag. Hier Zitate aus der ausführlichen Antwort:
- ...Viele Stadtbahnhaltestellen erfreuen sich großer Beliebtheit als Motiv für Filme und Fotos. Darüber freuen wir uns und erlauben daher grundsätzlich das Filmen und Fotografieren an Haltestellen für private Zwecke... ...Ungeachtet dessen erlauben Sie uns zudem den Hinweis, dass DSW21 keinen Einfluss auf die Bedingungen und Richtlinien von anderen Unternehmen hat. Sollte Wikimedia Commons demzufolge der Meinung sein, die Aufnahmen müssen gelöscht werden, da diese nicht durch die Panoramafreiheit geschützt sind, so ist dieser Aufforderung nachzukommen...
- Zusammengefasst bedeutet das für mich, sowohl ich wie auch der Eigentümer der U-Bahnstation, die Dortmunder Stadtwerke würden sich selbstverständlich eventuellen Machtdemonstationen zensorisch tätiger Wikimedia-Admins beugen. Eine juristische Auseinandersetzung mit dem Eigentümer und Bauherren wegen der Fotos ist jedoch nicht zu erwarten. Clic (talk) 08:38, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- Dazu 2 Gedanken!
- Ist Eigentümer gleich Urheber? Oder müssten nicht vielmehr die Künstler Ihre Zustimmung geben?
- Angenommen, es wird mit Verwendungen bei Commons keine rechtlichen Schritte geben, wer sagt, dass das dann auch für andere Webseiten gilt? Die Bilder dürfen von Commons aus frei weiterverwendet werden. Wie sicher kannst du sein, dass die Dortmunder Stadtwerke nicht bei anderen doch rechtliche Schritte einleiten?
- Das ganze ist mir nicht sicher genug, daher weiterhin Delete Lukas Beck (talk) 10:04, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- Dazu 2 Gedanken!
[ends]]
Deleted: per nomination - no consent from the artists. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:42, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Auf dem Damm
[edit]The station was built in 2000. This art is unfree until at earliest 2071. This art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
- File:Auf dem Damm Bahnsteigebene.jpg
- File:Auf dem Damm Mittelansicht.jpg
- File:Bahnsteigebene Auf dem Damm 2.jpg
- File:Eberhard Bosslet Subwaystation Duisburg 2000 blau.jpg
- File:Eberhard Bosslet Subwaystation Duisburg 2000 rot.jpg
- File:Stadtbahn-DU-aufdemdamm.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Auf dem Damm Blickrichtung Meiderich.jpg
- File:Verteilerebene Auf dem Damm 1.jpg
Lukas Beck (talk) 17:16, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:36, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
The station was built in 1992. This art is unfree until at earliest 2063. This art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either. Lukas Beck (talk) 17:17, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:36, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
copyright violation; contemporary artwork, no freedom of panorama.
- File:LICHTKREUZUNG Installation von Christoph Hildebrand in der Stadtkirche Celle 2014 Detail.jpg
- File:LICHTKREUZUNG Installation von Christoph Hildebrand in der Stadtkirche Celle 2014 Rückseite.jpg
- File:LICHTKREUZUNG Installation von Christoph Hildebrand in der Stadtkirche Celle 2014 Zentralperspektive.jpg
- File:LICHTKREUZUNG Installation von Christoph Hildebrand in der Stadtkirche Celle 2014.jpg
Martin Sg. (talk) 18:03, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:36, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Kunstmuseum Celle
[edit]copyright violation; contemporary artworks, no freedom of panorama.
- File:Christoph Hildebrand - Installation im Kunstmuseum Celle.jpg
- File:Kunstmuseum Celle mit Sammlung Robert Simon, Ausstellung Einleuchten, Waltraut Cooper, Hartung und Trenz, 2012 2013 Ansicht Haupteingang abends 01.JPG
Martin Sg. (talk) 18:05, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Nein. Das zweite Bild "File:Kunstmuseum Celle mit Sammlung Robert Simon, Ausstellung Einleuchten, Waltraut Cooper, Hartung und Trenz, 2012 2013 Ansicht Haupteingang abends 01.JPG" zeigt das Kunstmuseum abends von aussen, gesehen von der gegenüberliegenden Straßenseite. So sieht das leuchtende Museum abends draußen - im öffentlichen Raum - nunmal aus. Das Wort zur parallel gezeigten Ausstellung "Einleuchten" ist lediglich unten links kaum erkennbar zu lesen. Keine Urheberrechtsverletzung. Behalten. Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 09:18, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
- Der Text hier lässt tatsächlich diesen Schluss zu; die Bildlegende suggeriert Temporäres. Martin Sg. (talk) 21:17, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
- Nein. Das zweite Bild "File:Kunstmuseum Celle mit Sammlung Robert Simon, Ausstellung Einleuchten, Waltraut Cooper, Hartung und Trenz, 2012 2013 Ansicht Haupteingang abends 01.JPG" zeigt das Kunstmuseum abends von aussen, gesehen von der gegenüberliegenden Straßenseite. So sieht das leuchtende Museum abends draußen - im öffentlichen Raum - nunmal aus. Das Wort zur parallel gezeigten Ausstellung "Einleuchten" ist lediglich unten links kaum erkennbar zu lesen. Keine Urheberrechtsverletzung. Behalten. Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 09:18, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: one, deleted one per discussion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:38, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome) and Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome) - Exterior
[edit]Sorry, but this building is too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption. Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Palazzo della Civiltà Italiana.
- File:Auditorium Roma interno.JPG
- File:Da pacem Domine.JPG
- File:Da pacem Domine2.JPG
- File:Festival Cinema Roma 2010 001.JPG
- File:Sala Petrassi.JPG
- File:Sala Santa Cecilia.JPG
- File:Sala Sinopoli del Parco della Musica.JPG
- File:Auditorium Parco della Musica, cavea (Rome).jpg
- File:Auditorium pensilina 2473.JPG
- File:Auditorium terrazza 1200582-3.JPG
- File:Auditorium villa romana 1200595.JPG
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Raoli ✉ (talk) 12:51, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
- Comment Per il File:Auditorium villa romana 1200595.JPG se proprio dobbiamo cancellarlo, non potremmo almeno mantenere un ritaglio con solo i resti della villa romana? Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 14:43, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
- prima che perdiamo il file, l'ho ritagliata io File:Villa romana dell'auditorium.JPG, però pensateci voi per favore nel categorizzarla. Se il taglio è fatto male, caricatene una nuova versione. ciao --Pava (talk) 13:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
- vabbè alla fine ho categorizzato io, speriamo vada bene così --Pava (talk) 19:21, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
- Noto solo ora. Ottimo lavoro. Ti ringrazio. Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 22:04, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
- vabbè alla fine ho categorizzato io, speriamo vada bene così --Pava (talk) 19:21, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
- prima che perdiamo il file, l'ho ritagliata io File:Villa romana dell'auditorium.JPG, però pensateci voi per favore nel categorizzarla. Se il taglio è fatto male, caricatene una nuova versione. ciao --Pava (talk) 13:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
- Comment vi chiedo scusa ma mi sembra che questa discussione non tenga in alcun conto quanto recentemente stabilito qui; in particolare anche i beni sui quali insistano veri e propri diritti di proprietà intellettuale se esposti alla pubblica vista “dovranno ritenersi assoggettati ad un regime di commons puro e semplice”. --Esculapio (talk) 17:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
- Comment Ho letto quel bel articolo diviso in tre proposte, ma si tratta di un'interpretazione della legge. Il fatto è che il bene è tutelato dal diritto d'autore italiano per cui la foto (non esistendo libertà di panorama) diviene libera dopo i 70 anni e pure +1 dalla morte dell'autore, cioè in questo caso di Renzo Piano. Questa libertà è una cosa da scendere in piazza, altro che i noTAV. Sicuramente a Renzo Piano non fa ne caldo ne freddo se pubblichiamo qui le sue foto, ma la legge italiana adatta ad altri tempi non permette queste foto. Avviso che comunque la discussione è anche in inglese. Raoli ✉ (talk) 19:26, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
- Però si potrebbe fare qualcosa come fatto per la torre pirelli File:" 12 - ITALY - NO FOP Pirellone in ITALY.png per sensibilizzare l'opinione pubblica italiana su quest'altro problema. Se qualcuno sa fare una cosa del genere penso sia lo nostra miglior difesa. Raoli ✉ (talk) 19:35, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
- Comment appena ho tempo vedo cosa posso fare per creare una versione ad hoc per questo edificio simile a quella che ho fatto per il pirellone, tuttavia io ho seri dubbi che questa immagine File:Festival Cinema Roma 2010 001.JPG possa rientrare come le altre nella manovra di cancellazione per FOP --Pava (talk) 01:47, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
- Viene sempre rappresentato l'edificio su cui ci puoi vedere benissimo attaccata la scritta copyright. Niente de minimis qui, anzi penso che siccome il simbolo del Festival del Cinema di Roma (che si sta svolgendo in questi giorni) è sotto copyright vada rimosso ancora di più per questa motivazione. :( Raoli ✉ (talk) 04:24, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
- ditemi se può andar bene File:" 12 - ITALY - NO FOP Parco della musica copia PNG.png tenete conto che per non violare o cadere in qualche riproduzione spudorata non so quanto riuscirò ad essere più fedele (è più difficile pensare a cosa disegnare che il disegno in se che ci si mette 2 minuti) avevo pensato a un particolare delle sfere che mostrano le pelli, ma è un dettaglio secondo me eccessivo. Oppure una vista frontale (anziché una meno immediata pianta, però le prove che ho fatto mi hanno deluso) Ditemi voi --Pava (talk) 13:17, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
- Ottima! Ci avresti potuto anche mettere una croce celtica ma l'importante è il significato di questa immagine. Una cosa che ritengo anche necessaria - che dovrebbe attirare di più l'attenzione - è il fatto che l'immagine di protesta sia un po' verticale ma non troppo in modo da occupare più spazio nella pagina. Propongo di renderla un'immagine verticale più che orizzontale, se richiede troppo tempo allora mi piace anche così. Per il resto mi piace tanto più per il significato che per l'immagine in sè! Grazie mille Pava. Non sai quanto sono stato combattuto da romano prima di mandare in cancellazione tutte queste splendide immagini. :( Raoli ✉ (talk) 16:09, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
- Questa è perfetta. File:" 12 - ITALY - NO FOP Parco della musica verticale.png Grazie Pava! --Raoli ✉ (talk) 19:10, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
- mi fa piacere, fatene un uso idoneo all'enciclopedia però, mi raccomando. Ciaoo --Pava (talk) 19:21, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
- Questa è perfetta. File:" 12 - ITALY - NO FOP Parco della musica verticale.png Grazie Pava! --Raoli ✉ (talk) 19:10, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
- Ottima! Ci avresti potuto anche mettere una croce celtica ma l'importante è il significato di questa immagine. Una cosa che ritengo anche necessaria - che dovrebbe attirare di più l'attenzione - è il fatto che l'immagine di protesta sia un po' verticale ma non troppo in modo da occupare più spazio nella pagina. Propongo di renderla un'immagine verticale più che orizzontale, se richiede troppo tempo allora mi piace anche così. Per il resto mi piace tanto più per il significato che per l'immagine in sè! Grazie mille Pava. Non sai quanto sono stato combattuto da romano prima di mandare in cancellazione tutte queste splendide immagini. :( Raoli ✉ (talk) 16:09, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
- ditemi se può andar bene File:" 12 - ITALY - NO FOP Parco della musica copia PNG.png tenete conto che per non violare o cadere in qualche riproduzione spudorata non so quanto riuscirò ad essere più fedele (è più difficile pensare a cosa disegnare che il disegno in se che ci si mette 2 minuti) avevo pensato a un particolare delle sfere che mostrano le pelli, ma è un dettaglio secondo me eccessivo. Oppure una vista frontale (anziché una meno immediata pianta, però le prove che ho fatto mi hanno deluso) Ditemi voi --Pava (talk) 13:17, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
- Delete see above as proposer. Raoli ✉ (talk) 19:24, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
- Delete mi piange il cuore ma non sta a noi disquisire se una legge è o meno poco oculata, a noi sta rispettarla...--Threecharlie (talk) 20:57, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:15, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Image 1 & 2: {{NoFoP-Italy}} Renzo Piano is either alive, or has not been dead for over 70 years.
Image 3: COM:DW.
- File:Auditorium seen from monte mario.JPG
- File:Parco della Musica di Roma 3.jpg
- File:Parioli - Auditorium Parco della Musica map 1280352.JPG
Josve05a (talk) 19:19, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
deleted. INeverCry 01:34, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in Italy.
- File:Auditorium Parco della Musica - panoramio (1).jpg
- File:Auditorium Parco della Musica - panoramio (2).jpg
- File:Auditorium Parco della Musica - panoramio (3).jpg
- File:Auditorium Parco della Musica - panoramio (4).jpg
- File:Auditorium Parco della Musica - panoramio (6).jpg
- File:Auditorium Parco della Musica - panoramio.jpg
- File:Auditorium Parco della Musica - Villa Romana.jpg
- File:Auditorium Parco della Musica, Roma, terrazza in rosso.jpg
- File:Auditorium Parco della Musica, Roma, vasi colorati come note sul pentagramma.jpg
- File:Rome (Italy, October 2019) - 312 (50588814373).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_312_(50588814373).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
A1Cafel (talk) 07:46, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- In wikimedia there was a category without any warning. Also the photographs have been used for other content in wikipedia without any problem. I believe that an overly restrictive assessment of the ambiguous Italian regulation has been made.
- The provisions of the Cultural Heritage and Landscape Code (Legislative Decree 42/2004)
- However, the provisions that are most relevant in relation to freedom of panorama on cultural heritage are paragraphs 3 and 3-bis of art. 108, which establish cases of free use. No fee is due in the event that the reproductions, implemented on a non-profit basis, have been made by a private subject for personal use or for study purposes, or by a private or public subject in order to enhance the assets themselves . A fortiori, the activity of reproduction and dissemination of cultural assets (other than archival ones subject to restrictions) carried out on a non-profit basis and for purposes of study, research, free manifestation of thought or creative expression, as well as promotion of knowledge of cultural heritage.
- In order to simplify and rationalize the rules on
- reproduction of cultural goods, the Code of cultural goods and the
- landscape, pursuant to legislative decree n. 42 of 2004 and subsequent
- changes, the following changes are made:
- a) in paragraph 3 of the art. 108 after the word «public» are
- insert the following: «or private» and after the word «enhancement»
- the following are inserted: ", provided that they are implemented on a non-profit basis.";
- b) in art. 108, after paragraph 3, the following is added:
- (( «3-bis. The following activities, carried out, are in any case free
- non-profit, for purposes of study, research, free
- manifestation of thought or creative expression, promotion of
- knowledge of cultural heritage: ))
- 1) the reproduction of cultural goods (( other than goods
- bibliographic and archival )) implemented in ways that are not
- involve any physical contact with the property, nor the exposure of it
- same to light sources, ne', (( within the institutes of the
- culture, )) the use of stands or tripods;
- 2) the dissemination by any means of the images of goods
- cultural, legitimately acquired, so that they cannot be
- further reproduced (( for profit, not even indirectly. )) Albarubescens (talk) 09:42, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Albarubescens we don't accept copyrighted public space works of countries in which unrestricted commercial reuses of such works (like in postcards or souvenir items) are prohibited courtesy of the copyright law. There is absolutely no provision in copyright law that states free uses of artistic and architectural works in public space is allowed even without permissions from work authors (architects, sculptors, or muralists). COM:FOP Italy simply does not exists. Any content for introduction/presentation/informatory purposes only (like to present the culture of Italian architecture and sculptures) but for non-profit purposes is not allowed on Commons. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:55, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - Commons images must be free for all purposes, including commercial use. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:53, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Derivative work of a copyrighted trophy A1Cafel (talk) 08:15, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:51, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/"Campaign photo for Patrick Murray for Congress"
[edit]Credited to his campaign website, needs OTRS. Unlikely to be own work - low quality, tight crop
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Gbawden (talk) 08:35, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:51, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
1998 written in the front of the photo. may not be pre 1989 웃OO 09:35, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Country of origin is Iceland, so this must still be under copyright. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:50, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
The station was built in 2010. Its very unlikely, that this work of art is old enougt to be free (+70). This art in the train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:14, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:46, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Moosach
[edit]Creator is Martin Fengel, how is still alive. His art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
- File:20101212-U-Bahn Moosach 043.JPG
- File:20101212-U-Bahnhof Moosach 1.JPG
- File:Munich - U-Bahn - Moosach - 2012 - IMG 7610.jpg
- File:Munich - U-Bahn - Moosach - 2012 - IMG 7613.jpg
- File:U-Bahn Muenchen Moosach.JPG
- File:U-Bahnhof Moosach.JPG
Lukas Beck (talk) 16:17, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:46, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Creator is Ricarda Dietz, how is still alive. Her art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:47, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:45, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Doubtful license and authorship. FlorianH76 (talk) 23:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep High-res with EXIF from a point-and-shoot camera. Only Tineye results are from 2018, which postdates the Commons upload (2016). In these cases I tend to believe that it is the uploader's own work. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:12, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep clearly the original (size, exif). One-issue editor (Giorgi Vashadze in Ukrainian, Georgian in 2016 when user uploaded the photo). In all likelihood legit upload. Labrang (talk) 12:50, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 16:12, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
a post-1976 photo, inelegible under the PD-Italy/PD-1996 licence — danyele 00:24, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 23:56, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No Freedom Of Panorama In Moçambique 112.207.123.3 01:43, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 23:56, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Tiene que ser Puebla y no Pueblaa. 191.125.129.235 01:57, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Buen día. El nombre no es motivo suficiente para solicitar un borrado. en todo casó se puede pedir al autor un renombrado, pero no la eliminación, petrohs (gracias) 07:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC) petrohs (gracias) 07:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Renamed as requested. —holly {chat} 23:42, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Gmina Grodzisko Dolne (powiat leżajski, woj. podkarpackie, Polska) nie posiada własnego herbu. Prowadzone są prace nad jego opracowaniem i zatwierdzeniem, ale herbu nie mamy. Wdł. stanu prawnego na dzień 20.06.2023r. gmina posługuje się tylko i wyłącznie logiem, który został zatwierdzony przez władze gminy. Logo obowiązujące znajduje się m.in. na stronie: https://gminy.podkarpackie.com/gmina-grodzisko-dolne,21.html Z poważaniem Adam Chmura Sekretarz Gminy 193.19.166.58 (dyskusja) 08:53, 20 cze 2023 (CEST) Pamulab (talk) 07:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep This is the historical COA of the former city of Grodzisko Dolne, not the current administrative division. The file was erroneously renamed during transfering from pl:wiki to Commons. I renamed it again, to "POL Grodzisko Dolne historical COA". Since Pamulab is not requesting for deletion anymore (cf. Commons:Deletion requests/File:POL gmina Grodzisko Dolne COA.svg, the case should be closed. Michał Sobkowski (talk) 06:56, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Nie można zostawić z takim opisem. To nie jest i nigdy nie był herb miasta Grodzisko Dolne bo nie było takiego miasta. To jest już historyczny herb byłego ! miasta Grodzisko - Miasteczko, które istniało w latach ok.1740 - 1918. Pamulab (talk) 05:20, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Withdrawn. If any other corrections are required, please feel free to make them yourself. —holly {chat} 23:58, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Gmina Grodzisko Dolne (powiat leżajski, woj. podkarpackie, Polska) nie posiada własnego herbu. Prowadzone są prace nad jego opracowaniem i zatwierdzeniem, ale herbu nie mamy. Wdł. stanu prawnego na dzień 20.06.2023r. gmina posługuje się tylko i wyłącznie logiem, który został zatwierdzony przez władze gminy. Logo obowiązujące znajduje się m.in. na stronie: https://gminy.podkarpackie.com/gmina-grodzisko-dolne,21.html Z poważaniem Adam Chmura Sekretarz Gminy 193.19.166.58 (dyskusja) 08:53, 20 cze 2023 (CEST) Pamulab (talk) 07:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Można zachować ten plik na Commons pod warunkiem! Zmienić tytuł pliku na: File: Grodzisko - byłe miasto w woj. podkarpackim. Opis. Herb byłego miasta Grodzisko.
( w opracowaniu Herby miast polskich (1960) Mariana Gumowskiego - istnieje opis herbu byłego miasta Grodziska: "kielich mszalny" (s. 53) do ewentualnego wykorzystania w art. historycznych. Zmienić licencję na: {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (Pamulab (talk) 06:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC))
- Keep This is the historical COA of the former city of Grodzisko Dolne, not the current administrative division. The file was erroneously renamed during transfering from pl:wiki to Commons. I renamed it again, to "POL Grodzisko Dolne historical COA". Since Pamulab is not requesting for deletion anymore, the case should be closed. Michał Sobkowski (talk) 06:56, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Nie można zostawić w takiej formie. Zły opis pliku. Herb nie był i nie jest historycznym herbem tylko Grodziska Dolnego był herbem miasta Grodzisko które podzieliło się z czasem na obecne Grodzisko Górne i Grodzisko Dolne. (Pamulab (talk) 08:39, 21 June 2023 (UTC))
- Pamulab: Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel a media or gallery needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikimedia Commons is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any media and gallery by simply following the Edit link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. Michał Sobkowski (talk) 09:45, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Poprawiony opis pliku. Do zmiany tytuł pliku. Po zmianie tytułu zostawić na Commons.
- (Pamulab (talk) 13:42, 21 June 2023 (UTC))
Kept: Withdrawn. —holly {chat} 23:59, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Centro Meridiana
[edit]In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in Italy.
- File:Centro Meridiana.jpg
- File:Lecco - Centro Commerciale Meridiana - panoramio - MarkusMark.jpg
- File:Lecco - Centro Commerciale Meridiana - panoramio.jpg
A1Cafel (talk) 07:36, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Per the nominator. Clearly copyrighted. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:30, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 23:59, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Derechos de autor Vrasz (talk) 03:25, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Per COM:TOO Spain, the logo of Real Madrid is below the threshold of originality in Spain and cannot be copyrighted. —holly {chat} 20:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Real Madrid's logo is not own work WikiDasher (talk) 12:51, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Materialscientist (talk) 00:40, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Cité internationale de Lyon
[edit]No FOP in France. Not de minimis because Cité internationale is the reason for taking the photos listed and removing the building would make the photos useless.
- File:Cité internationale de Lyon view from Caluire-et-Cuire 1.jpg
- File:Cité internationale de Lyon view from Caluire-et-Cuire 2.jpg
- File:Cité-Internationale et Amphitheatre 3000.JPG
- File:Cristalis lyon c1 citeinternationale.jpg
- File:Lyon (mai 2012) 096.JPG
- File:Lyon CI 11.JPG
- File:Lyon CI 3.JPG
- File:Lyon CI 6.JPG
- File:Lyon CI 7.JPG
- File:Lyon-Amphitheatre 3000.JPG
- File:Vue Salle3000 Lyon Helicoptere.jpg
_096.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Lophotrochozoa (talk) 15:11, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
- for what concern my pictures (the first two ones), if i remember correctly it was already considered de minimis some months ago. The title was just given that way to better locate the image, but the core of the image was the panorama of Lyon from the hill at north, especially the skyscreepers (look at the category "Panoramics of Lyon"). Otherways you have the ridicoulous situation that you can take the panorama with the 4 skycreepers (which is de minimis) from one side and not the other. in any case after three years and a half in Lyon when I think to an image of the cité international I would think to something VERY different than those images. (and that's why of course they were never used in fr:Cité internationale (Lyon)). For what concerns the majority of the other pictures in the list, they clearly refer to the buildings and their style, but I would "save" for sure File:Cristalis lyon c1 citeinternationale.jpg and maybe File:Lyon_CI_3.JPG.--Alexmar983 (talk) 18:17, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Kept the ones that are COM:DM, deleted the rest. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:48, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Cité internationale de Lyon
[edit]In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in France.
- File:20151105 lyon087.jpg
- File:20151105 lyon090.jpg
- File:20151105 lyon091.jpg
- File:20151105 lyon092.jpg
- File:Cité internationale de Lyon - bâtiments 1.jpg
- File:Cité internationale de Lyon - bâtiments 2.jpg
- File:Cité internationale de Lyon - bâtiments 3.jpg
- File:Cité internationale de Lyon.JPG
- File:L'amphithéâtre Salle 3000 (32623442978).jpg
- File:Lyon - Salle 3000.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
A1Cafel (talk) 07:38, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 20:46, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Fehllizenzierung von FreyGruppe als "Eigenes Werk" Urheber kann aber nur eine natürliche Person sein Lutheraner (talk) 09:33, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: "FreyGruppe" refers to the uploader, so it does not mean that the author is not an individual. However, it appears the de-WP article that this was uploaded for was deleted, so I'm declaring this to be out of scope. —holly {chat} 20:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Markus Lüpertz
[edit]copyright violation; works by living artist; no freedom of panorama.
- File:Koeln - Kirche St. Andreas 1.jpg
- File:Sculpture at German Chancellory in Berlin.jpg
- File:St. Andreas 2018.jpg
Martin Sg. (talk) 09:37, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Lieber Martin Sg.,
- es ist wieder dasselbe Problem wie schon bei anderen Aufnahmen in Kirchen - die eineinhalb Lüpertz-Fenster auf dem Foto stellem m.E. keine Urheberrechtsverletzung dar, denn die Fenster sind nicht als solche das Hauptmotiv des Bildes, sondern sie sind im Zuammenwirken mit dem Sonnenlicht Urheber der besonderen Raumwirkung, um die es mir ging. Keinesfalls wollte ich die betreffenden Fenster kopieren oder als solche herausheben; vgl. Wiedergabe der Fenster z.B. bei WESRART v, 29.11.2011 bzw. 30.1.2014 (über Google zu finden).
- Freundliche Grüße, Michael Wittwer 2003:C7:707:D600:DC99:9BFF:FED4:752A 13:34, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Guten Tag,
- Der Vorschlag zur Löschung meines Fotos ist etwas rätselhaft. Es handelt sich um ein Bild eines ehemaligen Treppenturms in der Kirche St. Andreas. Ein Überbleibsel der ursprünglichen romanischen Kirche, eingebettet in ein jüngeres gotisches Bauwerk. Es handelt sich nicht um das Bild eines Fensters. Zugegeben, die Wände sind durch das Licht, das durch das rechts halb sichtbare Fenster fällt, gefärbt. Aber Markus Lüpertz hat zwar das Glas geschaffen, das das Licht färbt, nicht aber die Sonne.
GVR (talk) 14:39, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Zumindest File:Koeln - Kirche St. Andreas 1.jpg sollte nicht gelöscht werden. Gegenstand des Bildes ist der Treppenturm. Lüpertz' Kirchenfenster ist hier nur Beiwerk, nur zufällig mit im Bild, was schon daran erkennbar ist, dass ein wesentlicher Teil des Fensters gar nicht mit abgebildet ist. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 14:42, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete for the second and third images, but Keep for the first one. I think an arguement could be made that the point in the first image is to show off the stairwell, not the stained glass window. So there's no justification to delete it. That doesn't go for the second and third image though. Especially the second since it is clearly about the statue. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:30, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: two per nomination, and kept the first one as per Adamant1. —holly {chat} 20:52, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
While the composition is in the public domain, this 1962 Deutsche Grammophon sound recording is not. It is protected for 70 years in the EU member countries and until February 15, 2067 in the US (see Template:PD-US-record-expired). So the file should be deleted. It can be restored on February 15, 2067. Rosenzweig τ 10:35, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- The file is not in copyright in EU countries. The 70-year term for recordings does not apply to those published before November 1, 1963.
- The file should, however, be deleted, like most audio files which were PD in their home country and uploaded to Commons before the CLASSICS act.
- D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 14:46, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- You're probably right here, Article 10 (5) of the consolidated 2006 directive (with 2011 changes) mentions 2011 dates, but what they apparently mean (it's complicated legalese) is that the new, longer terms (from October 31, 2011) shall apply to those works which are still protected by the old, shorter terms (which were valid on October 30, 2011) on November 1, 2013. So indeed only recordings from 1963 and later. I was wondering about that, and here's the explanation. --Rosenzweig τ 15:45, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, that 70-year term only applies to recordings released on November 1, 1963 or later (n.b., a recording that was fixed before November 1, 1963, but not disseminated during the first 50 years from fixation, became PD 50 years after fixation). Anyway, this is just an instance of Template:PD-US-record. See also the Village Pump discussion. I think all these files should deleted, because they are pretty straightforwardly infringing in the US (even if the infringement is not technically of copyright, because the protection scheme is not technically copyright). But that's more of a matter for the entire group (putting aside any which are actually PD-US now), and not just a single file. D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 19:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Hm. Usually, copyright terms run to the end of the year, that is definitely the case in Germany, also in France, I think in all EU countries. So recordings released in the first 10 months of 1963 should be affected as well, because they were still protected on November 1, 2013. --Rosenzweig τ 23:46, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, that 70-year term only applies to recordings released on November 1, 1963 or later (n.b., a recording that was fixed before November 1, 1963, but not disseminated during the first 50 years from fixation, became PD 50 years after fixation). Anyway, this is just an instance of Template:PD-US-record. See also the Village Pump discussion. I think all these files should deleted, because they are pretty straightforwardly infringing in the US (even if the infringement is not technically of copyright, because the protection scheme is not technically copyright). But that's more of a matter for the entire group (putting aside any which are actually PD-US now), and not just a single file. D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 19:18, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- You're probably right here, Article 10 (5) of the consolidated 2006 directive (with 2011 changes) mentions 2011 dates, but what they apparently mean (it's complicated legalese) is that the new, longer terms (from October 31, 2011) shall apply to those works which are still protected by the old, shorter terms (which were valid on October 30, 2011) on November 1, 2013. So indeed only recordings from 1963 and later. I was wondering about that, and here's the explanation. --Rosenzweig τ 15:45, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Keep As mentioned above, this is PD in the EU. 185.172.241.184 05:04, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
- But not in the US. --Rosenzweig τ 21:53, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and ordered a universal replace with File:Ravel's Jeux d'eau, M. 30 - Anna Sutyagina.ogg. —holly {chat} 20:57, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo, as it is too detailed to be pd-logo. Copyright would belong to RFK Novi Sad 1921, and so they would need to release it appropriately, which is not currently the case 81.99.158.169 13:59, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 20:59, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Odeonsplatz
[edit]Creator was Paolo Nestler, how died in 2010. His art is unfree until 2081. His art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
- File:Mosaik im Zwischengeschoss des U-Bahnhofes Odeonsplatz in München.JPG
- File:Munich 28 Feb 2021 08 22 44 171000.jpeg
- File:Munich 28 Feb 2021 08 22 59 996000.jpeg
- File:U-Bhf Odeonsplatz elevator to Hofgarten.jpg
Lukas Beck (talk) 14:07, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- How is File:U-Bhf Odeonsplatz elevator to Hofgarten.jpg also considered part of it? This art is outside and can be seen from the street. It is located in the entrance to Hofgarten. --Robot8A (talk) 15:02, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Well it looked like an interior shot for me. But sure, someone with better local knowledge could be very helpful in this case. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- It is located on the small gate on the right of the big arch: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=48.142596503818&lng=11.577534860719993&z=18.091806231612583&pKey=501249664642843&focus=photo&x=0.4918697063075469&y=0.42635133351362664&zoom=0 I do not know if a better image is available out there, and I am not in Munich right now. --Robot8A (talk) 08:09, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Here a little bit of the elevator sign can be seen: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=48.142523776406&lng=11.577977788217&z=17&pKey=188222903081653&focus=photo&x=0.5571184091772677&y=0.47912507888075817&zoom=0.508130081300813 On the arch just to the right of the girl on the bike. This is the left corner of the sign seen in File:U-Bhf Odeonsplatz elevator to Hofgarten.jpg. Robot8A (talk) 08:14, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- It is located on the small gate on the right of the big arch: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=48.142596503818&lng=11.577534860719993&z=18.091806231612583&pKey=501249664642843&focus=photo&x=0.4918697063075469&y=0.42635133351362664&zoom=0 I do not know if a better image is available out there, and I am not in Munich right now. --Robot8A (talk) 08:09, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Well it looked like an interior shot for me. But sure, someone with better local knowledge could be very helpful in this case. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: three per nomination, kept the last one per Robot8A. —holly {chat} 21:05, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
copyright violation; contemporary artwork, no freedom of panorama. Martin Sg. (talk) 18:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Die Fotocollage wurde von der Künstlerin selbst hochgeladen. Hier kann also kein Fall der Urheberechtsverletzung vorliegen. Keep. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 14:45, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keine Urheberrechtsverletzung; eigenes Werk der hochladenden Künstlerin. Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 08:24, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
- Braucht trotzdem gültige VRT-Freigabe! Martin Sg. (talk) 21:18, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
- Woraus geht das hervor? -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 12:34, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
- Braucht trotzdem gültige VRT-Freigabe! Martin Sg. (talk) 21:18, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keine Urheberrechtsverletzung; eigenes Werk der hochladenden Künstlerin. Bernd Schwabe in Hannover (talk) 08:24, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, as the artist can certainly license their own works. —holly {chat} 21:15, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ilse Paul in Hannover (talk · contribs)
[edit]copyright violation; contemporary artworks/fotos, no freedom of panorama.
- File:2019-03-31 Ausstellung Serie ROT von Ilse Paul im Kanzleicafé Celle 09.jpg
- File:2019-03-31 Ausstellung Serie ROT von Ilse Paul im Kanzleicafé Celle 05.jpg
- File:2019-03-31 Ausstellung Serie ROT von Ilse Paul im Kanzleicafé Celle 04.jpg
- Die Fotos von Ilse Paul sind in diesen ersten drei Bildern nur Beiwerk. Vor allem aber sind die Bilder von der Fotokünstlerin selbst hochgeladen worden. Ein Urheberrechtsverstoß liegt hier nicht vor. Keep. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 15:08, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Soviel mir bekannt, bedarf auch selbst Hochgeleadenes einer VRT-Feigabe, so urheberrechtlich geschützt. Martin Sg. (talk) 16:13, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- Die Fotos von Ilse Paul sind in diesen ersten drei Bildern nur Beiwerk. Vor allem aber sind die Bilder von der Fotokünstlerin selbst hochgeladen worden. Ein Urheberrechtsverstoß liegt hier nicht vor.
- Kept these three. The artist can certainly release her own works under a free license. —holly {chat} 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Das Plakat wurde von der Urheberin selbst hochgeladen. Ein Urheberrechtsverstoß liegt hier nicht vor. Keep. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 15:08, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Das Plakat wurde von der Urheberin selbst hochgeladen. Ein Urheberrechtsverstoß liegt hier nicht vor.
- Kept. The artist can certainly release her own works under a free license. —holly {chat} 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Das Altarkreuz und die Buntglasfenster sind auf diesem Bild nur Beiwerk, Hauptgegenstand des Bildes sind die Musiker. Das Altarkreuz ist zudem so klein und mit geringer Auflösung abgebildet, dass das Foto zu seiner Darstellung gar nicht nutzbar wäre. Die Buntglasfenster könnten notfalls oben vom Bild abgeschnitten werden, was allerdings ein komisches Bildformat ergäbe. Ist aber gar nicht nötig, weil Beiwerk. Keep. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 15:08, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Deutschland ist sehr streng puncto dessen, was als de minimis gilt – „ohne bemerkt zu werden aus dem Bild entfernbar“ liegt hier keinesfalls vor. Martin Sg. (talk) 16:13, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- Das Altarkreuz und die Buntglasfenster sind auf diesem Bild nur Beiwerk, Hauptgegenstand des Bildes sind die Musiker. Das Altarkreuz ist zudem so klein und mit geringer Auflösung abgebildet, dass das Foto zu seiner Darstellung gar nicht nutzbar wäre. Die Buntglasfenster könnten notfalls oben vom Bild abgeschnitten werden, was allerdings ein komisches Bildformat ergäbe. Ist aber gar nicht nötig, weil Beiwerk.
- Deleted. This appears to fulfill the "The work noticeably impacts the style or mood conveyed" clause of Section 57. —holly {chat} 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Bei diesem Bild sind die Fotos an der Wand nur Beiwerk in geringer Auflösung, Hauptgegenstand sind die Diskutanten. Keep. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 15:08, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Siehe eins obendran. Martin Sg. (talk) 16:13, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- Bei diesem Bild sind die Fotos an der Wand nur Beiwerk in geringer Auflösung, Hauptgegenstand sind die Diskutanten.
- Deleted. This appears to fulfill the "the work underscores a particular effect or statement" clause of Section 57, the statement being that the individuals being photographed are at this specific art exhibit. —holly {chat} 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Bei diesem Bild sind die Fotos nur Beiwerk, aus spitzem Winkel aufgenommen. Hauptgegenstand sind die Betrachter. Keep. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 15:08, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Bei diesem Bild sind die Fotos nur Beiwerk, aus spitzem Winkel aufgenommen. Hauptgegenstand sind die Betrachter.
- Deleted. This appears to fulfill the "the work underscores a particular effect or statement" clause of Section 57, the statement being that the individuals being photographed are at this specific art exhibit. —holly {chat} 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Das abgebildete Schwarzweißbild ist offenbar sehr alt, das Urheberrecht dürfte abgelaufen sein. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 15:08, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Deleted. Although the projected photo could be old enough to be PD, we don't know anything about its country of first publication, so we can't even make a good guess. —holly {chat} 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Bei diesem Bild silnd die Fotos an der Wand nur Beiwerk in geringer Auflösung, teils auch von den Personen verdeckt, die Hauptgegenstand des Bildes sind. Keep. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 15:08, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Bei diesem Bild silnd die Fotos an der Wand nur Beiwerk in geringer Auflösung, teils auch von den Personen verdeckt, die Hauptgegenstand des Bildes sind.
- Deleted. This appears to fulfill the "the work underscores a particular effect or statement" clause of Section 57, the statement being that the individuals being photographed are at this specific art exhibit. —holly {chat} 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- File:Fotoprojekt Ihmezentrum, Ausstellung "Drinnen und Draußen", Kunsthalle Faust e.V. 11.1. - 29.1.2017, Fotograf Simon Slipek, 02.jpg
- File:Fotoprojekt Ihmezentrum, Ausstellung "Drinnen und Draußen", Kunsthalle Faust e.V. 11.1. - 29.1.2017, 01.jpg
- File:Haus der Religionen in Hannover, Ausstellung der sechs Weltreligionen 04.jpg
- File:Haus der Religionen in Hannover, Ausstellung der sechs Weltreligionen 05.jpg
- Diese beiden Übersichtsaufnahmen enthalten die möglicherweise urheberrechtlich geschützten Werke in so geringer Auflösung, dass eine Nutzung kaum möglich ist. Keep. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 15:08, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Diese beiden Übersichtsaufnahmen enthalten die möglicherweise urheberrechtlich geschützten Werke in so geringer Auflösung, dass eine Nutzung kaum möglich ist.
- Deleted. These were obviously not de minimis. —holly {chat} 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- File:Ausstellung Reflexionen-Reflektionen, Marktkirche Hannover 2016, Ilse Paul und Eckard Schrader Installation in memoriam 1940 05.jpg
- File:Ausstellung Reflexionen-Reflektionen, Marktkirche Hannover 2016, Ilse Paul und Eckard Schrader Installation in memoriam 1940 04.jpg
- File:Ausstellung Reflexionen-Reflektionen, Marktkirche Hannover 2016, Ilse Paul und Eckard Schrader Stereobetrachter 12.jpg
- File:Ausstellung Reflexionen-Reflektionen, Marktkirche Hannover 2016, Ilse Paul und Eckard Schrader Fotografien von Eckard Schrader 07.jpg
- File:Ausstellung Reflexionen-Reflektionen, Marktkirche Hannover 2016, Ilse Paul und Eckard Schrader Arbeiten von Ilse Paul 03.jpg
- Soweit es sich um Arbeiten von Ilse Paul handelt, handelt es sich nicht um eine Urheberrechtsverletzung, weil sie selber sie hochgeladen hat. Keep. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 15:08, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- siehe * 1. Martin Sg. (talk) 16:13, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
- Soweit es sich um Arbeiten von Ilse Paul handelt, handelt es sich nicht um eine Urheberrechtsverletzung, weil sie selber sie hochgeladen hat.
- Kept these five. The artist can certainly release her own works under a free license. —holly {chat} 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Kept as this appears to be an outdoor sculpture, and is thus covered by FOP (see other photos of these sculptures in Category:Nana by Niki de Saint Phalle in Hannover). —holly {chat} 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- File:Enfants Terribles - Kinder der Louise B. Matvey Slavin Nana Bastrup Ausstellung im Kunstverein Barsinghausen Raum für Kunst 01.jpg
- File:Enfants Terribles - Kinder der Louise B. Matvey Slavin Nana Bastrup Ausstellung im Kunstverein Barsinghausen Raum für Kunst 02.jpg
- Deleted these two as they appear to be indoor exhibits and are not covered by FOP. —holly {chat} 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Martin Sg. (talk) 18:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Auch diese – ausweislich nicht selbst geschaffenen Kunstwerke – v. Hochladerin als Eigenes Werk tituliert...
Falls jemand einwenden will, stünden ja auf öffentlichem Grund: Panoramafreiheit greift dort nur für bleibend Installiertes. Martin Sg. (talk) 16:13, 23 June 2023 (UTC) - Kept this last one as there doesn't appear to be any copyrightable objects visible. The neon sign reading "FUTURING" falls under COM:UTIL. —holly {chat} 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- Delete For all of them. A few are probably de minimis, but most clearly aren't. I don't have the time or energy to parse through Robert Weemeyer's inline comments to vote on every individual image either. So I say just delete all of them. Most, or all of the claims that were made by Robert Weemeyer are clearly nonsense anyway. Especially the whole thing about how the offending works in the images are to low resolution to matter. I can make out most of the images in this file perfectly fine. Same goes for the photographs behind the people's heads in this image. It's not like standard of what qualifies for freedom of panorama or not is based how clear the artwork in the image is anyway though. Of course there's probably exceptions, but a photographs of artwork taken from 5 feet away clearly isn't one of them. --Adamant1 (talk) 15:56, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
See inline comments. —holly {chat} 21:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
copyvio; contemp. artwork; no fop. Martin Sg. (talk) 19:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 22:00, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation. Not PD-TEXTLOGO. JJ98 (Talk) 11:44, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep - compare other examples in Threshold of originality#United States. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 14:27, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo Jcb (talk) 20:37, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
The shape does not look simple, the "Rocko's" text looks like it was drawn by the artist, as it does not look simple. It would rather be a smaller fair use non-free image on English Wikipedia. RTSthestardust (talk) 21:40, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Previously kept as a textlogo, and since File:Cyberpunk 2077 logo.svg is OK per COM:TOO US, is this really that much more complex? How about File:Jamba logo.svg? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:40, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep it has already been kept. and it is still just some simple letters in different shapes. not enough to qualify for copyright in my view. SDudley (talk) 15:44, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- Delete I think this, with the shadows, artistic choices in lettering, etc., falls above COM:TOO. I think this is significantly more complex than the Cyberpunk logo, which is some stretched text and a weather-worn effect. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:32, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. —holly {chat} 22:44, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
The photo was taken during the Second World War. There is no evidence that it was published more than 70 years ago. Photo copied from a private site without permission. 5.173.127.8 22:22, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- To me, this photo looks very professional, i.e. it has been staged by the soldiers, photgraphed by a military phorographer, censored and released to the public, probably by photographic means not by printing in a printing press. It does not look like a snapshot of one of the soldiers at all. Please keep. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 03:52, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: If the photographer is truly unknown then {{PD-EU-no author disclosure}} would apply, but it wouldn't have been PD by the URAA date of 1996, and as such, remains copyrighted in the US until 2036 at the earliest. —holly {chat} 22:44, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Poor quality COM:PENIS photo, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 02:36, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Weak keep passable IMO Dronebogus (talk) 11:40, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep The huge visible veins are by themself unusual --Trade (talk) 18:07, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion, the unusual veins have potential educational use. --Abzeronow (talk) 15:51, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Oberwiesenfeld
[edit]The train station was built in 2007. These art is unfree until at earliest 2078. This art in the train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
- File:Munich - U-Bahn - Oberwiesenfeld - 2012 - IMG 7596.jpg
- File:Munich Subway Station Oberwiesenfeld -2.jpg
- File:Munich Subway Station Oberwiesenfeld.jpg
- File:München — Moosacher Straße — U-Bahn-Haltepunkt Oberwiesenfeld.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Oberwiesenfeld (1804976053).jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Oberwiesenfeld 01.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Lukas Beck (talk) 14:10, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- This - as well as my other Munich subway pictures tagged for deletion lately - was taken using an official permit by Münchner Verkehrsgesellschaft that included the right to use these pictures afterwards. I am no lawyer but I understand it in a way that allows usage of pictures taken with official permit by domestic authority. --FloSch (talk) 09:12, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- But does the transport company really have copyright claims, or rather the architects? Lukas Beck (talk) 11:32, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, we need VRT permission from copyright holder. --Abzeronow (talk) 15:52, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Oberwiesenfeld
[edit]The images were uploaded after the deletion request, but are protected by copyright for the same reason. There is no freedom of panorama for interior shots in Germany.
Lukas Beck (talk) 09:42, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:20, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/SPIDER-MAN ACROSS THE SPIDER-VERSEBUS STOP ADVERTISEMENT IN CHINA
[edit]COM:FOP China allows for FoP on almost everything displayed with attribution, however, can be problematic if it becomes 'fair use'. My argument is that the advertisement banner here is not de minimis, display in a temporary manner and may not even be of a 'fair use' nature.
- The banner is taken at a high resolution, and is the primary subject of the photo, therefore not de minimis, which allows the extraction of the advertisement banner (again, at a pretty high resolution) and of the individual characters at a relatively good enough resolution for the images, which may infringe on the commercial rights of the copyright owner.
- As a bus stop advertisement banner, the advertisement can be said to be temporary, to be replaced either when the contract between the party managing the advertisement slot and the movie's publicity to display the banner up is up, and/or when there is a newer banner scheduled. The Chinese FOP provision can hardly apply to works temporarily displayed in public places
- The smaller extracted images (close-ups) are above 800px by 800px in size which may be sufficient for the images to be reused commercially in many different ways.
Prior FoP discussions for consideration: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Poster of Your Name.jpg Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Your Name Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Murals_in_Beijing_Subway_stations#Files_in_Category:Murals_in_Beijing_Subway_stations_4
- File:SPIDER-MAN ACROSS THE SPIDER-VERSEBUS STOP ADVERTISEMENT IN CHINA.jpg
- File:SPIDER-MAN ACROSS THE SPIDER-VERSEBUS STOP ADVERTISEMENT IN CHINA (cropped).jpg
- File:SPIDER-MAN ACROSS THE SPIDER-VERSEBUS STOP ADVERTISEMENT IN CHINA (close-up of Gwen).jpg
- File:SPIDER-MAN ACROSS THE SPIDER-VERSEBUS STOP ADVERTISEMENT IN CHINA (Close-up of Spider-Man 2099).jpg
- File:SPIDER-MAN ACROSS THE SPIDER-VERSEBUS STOP ADVERTISEMENT IN CHINA (close-up of Miles Morales).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Robertsky (talk) 15:05, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep The China FoP tag clearly states a work may be used without permission from, and without payment of remuneration to, the copyright owner, provided that the name of the author and the title of the work shall be indicated. This isn't about fair use, it's about the fact that Chinese copyright law allows the use of publicly displayed art. I also have to point out Commons:Freedom of panorama#Choice of law which states current practice on Commons is to retain photos based on the more lenient law of the country in which the object is situated and the country in which the photo is taken. Basically Wikimedia Commons allows derivative works in cases of FoP. Di (they-them) (talk) 16:10, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- I have no dispute as to which FoP law is this applicable. The question is whether the images are in line with that particular FoP laws. Robertsky (talk) 02:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Weak keep as uploader-ish. I don't think anyone disagrees that the advertisement is the most prominent part of the picture, and I'm not sure why you're talking about fair use considering we're on Commons, so I won't argue those points. I also agree that the displaying of the advertisement is temporary. My Chinese is quite bad, but my best attempt at translating the Supreme People's Court decision that lead to the line of FoP China saying that temporary works do not fall under the provision is as follows:
It is noted that this work of art is specifically created to be displayed at the Lantern Festival. After the festival is over, Hou's work will not be displayed in a public place again. Therefore, the work is not really "displayed in a public place".
— Supreme People's Court, in: Second item in the numbered list of Wikisource:zh:最高人民法院关于自贡市公共交通总公司与自贡市五星广告灯饰公司侵犯著作权纠纷案的答复
- I interpret this ruling not to mean that all temporarily displayed works are not eligible under Article 24, but rather works that are both temporarily displayed in a public place and are displayed in an exclusive manner are not eligible. This advertisement is not exclusively displayed; it is an advertisement, and by the nature of its existence, the publisher wants as many people as possible to see it. It is located at a public bus stop and will be there probably until the theater run of the movie is over. Consider this in contrast to the Lantern Festival painting case, where the festival is a single, special day, where there is no reason to believe the work may ever be published again. It is also worth noting that this ruling is from 1995, and the idea of what it means to publicly display a work in general is quite different now. FoP China quotes a translation of a Supreme People's Court case that pretty much just parrots the original law, making it a half-direct contradiction because said original law makes no mention of the permanence of display, and this decision is from 2005. It is also worth noting that "replies" by the Supreme People's Court do not set nationwide precedent, and cannot have any legally binding force outside the case they are concerned with. It is also worth noting that the law has been amended many years after this—I reiterate—1995 decision, with still no mention of the permanence of public display. Snowmanonahoe (talk) 17:05, 20 June 2023 (UTC); edited 03:05, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- So no dispute that it is an advertisement, and prior FoP cases that dealt with similar advertisements (posters of Your Name movie and ofo bike rentals) in China, linked in my nomination, have thus far resulted in the deletion of the images. Robertsky (talk) 02:45, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Regarding the prior cases: The "Your Name" cases are based on the argument that the unauthorized use of the photos is copyright infringement, which directly goes against what the FoP tag says. Simply speaking, they are factually wrong, FoP is not copyright infringement. Regarding the murals in Beijing, those were deleted because the original authors were not credited, which is not the case here; Sony is credited in the description of the Spider-Man files. Di (they-them) (talk) 15:16, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- I was referring to the ofo bike adverts in the murals case, not the murals itself, hence the direct link to the section in the case page, not the case. Robertsky (talk) 18:24, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- I know, the bike ads were what I was talking about. The deletion rationale was that the creator of the ads was uncredited. That does not apply here. Di (they-them) (talk) 21:14, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- ok. then let's address the fair use portion. such high quality crops would likely infringe on the commercial interest of the copyright owners. Robertsky (talk) 06:03, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- I know, the bike ads were what I was talking about. The deletion rationale was that the creator of the ads was uncredited. That does not apply here. Di (they-them) (talk) 21:14, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- I was referring to the ofo bike adverts in the murals case, not the murals itself, hence the direct link to the section in the case page, not the case. Robertsky (talk) 18:24, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- So no dispute that it is an advertisement, and prior FoP cases that dealt with similar advertisements (posters of Your Name movie and ofo bike rentals) in China, linked in my nomination, have thus far resulted in the deletion of the images. Robertsky (talk) 02:45, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- This has nothing to do with fair use. Fair use isn't even allowed on Commons so I'm not sure why you're bringing it up. The tag clearly states that a work may be used without permission from, and without payment of remuneration to, the copyright owner, provided that the name of the author and the title of the work shall be indicated. This isn't about fair use at all, it's just the fact that it isn't a copyright violation. Di (they-them) (talk) 17:12, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- I think you are generous with the interpretation of the applicable laws.
- My arguments are that the advertisement banner here is copyrighted, regardless of the public display, given that advertisements are temporary in nature. The images here are of high quality enough for exploitation outside of the intended nature, advertisement, which CC-license allows for. But such temporary displays Copying, painting, photographing, and video recording of the artistic works specified in the preceding paragraph may be used again in a reasonable manner and scope without causing any infringement. The FOP page cited a 2016 case of the use of a photo of an outdoor sculpture on postcards for sale, which in addition for infringing on the provisions of not attributing original creator, also found that the usage of the artistic work to be outside the intended purpose of the work.
- Additionally, although I didn't bring this up earlier, but given the globalised nature of the subject, international copyright laws or laws across multiple jurisdictions should be looked at as well, i.e. The safest way to apply international copyright law is to consider the laws of all the relevant jurisdictions and then use the most restrictive combination of laws to determine whether something is copyrighted or not. Since the rights to Spideys is US-based, US copyright laws would be applicable as well. Unless I am missing something in my reading of US copyright laws, such images are not copyright-free.
- I think we should err on the side of potential copyright violations. Robertsky (talk) 21:39, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Regarding the issue of permanence, see the above argument by Snowmanonahoe. Regarding US copyright law, that's completely irrelevant per Commons:Freedom of panorama#Choice of law. Commons practice is to allow FoP works under the most lenient applicable law, because applying the law of every country is impossible. If we required that FoP files were compliant with US law, we would have no images of statues, murals, or public art anywhere. Di (they-them) (talk) 21:55, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- This is where you are oversimplifying things. There is no issues of the interpretation of FoP applicability on copyrighted subjects created and displayed in a single country, i.e. copyrighted statutes created and displayed in Singapore, no issue. copyrighted statutes created and displayed in China, no issue, etc. However, the subject here is subjected to multiple copyright jurisdictions, China and the States. FoP (and again, usually is a subset of the copyright laws) in China may allow for such treatment, but not the copyright laws (not FoP) in the States. Robertsky (talk) 22:59, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- Commons:Freedom of panorama#Choice of law specifically says current practice on Commons is to retain photos based on the more lenient law of the country in which the object is situated and the country in which the photo is taken. The advertisement was situated in China, and the photo was taken in China. US copyright law is irrelevant. Commons applies the more lenient law, which in this case is Chinese law. The page also specifically mentions cases where a photo is taken of something from another country in a different country (IE, South Korea doesn't have usable FoP, but if somebody takes photos of South Korean objects from North Korea, that's usable because we use the more lenient law. In comparison, this is a photo of artwork made in the US, situated and taken in China, so we would use Chinese laws because they're the most lenient.) Di (they-them) (talk) 23:14, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- This is where you are oversimplifying things. There is no issues of the interpretation of FoP applicability on copyrighted subjects created and displayed in a single country, i.e. copyrighted statutes created and displayed in Singapore, no issue. copyrighted statutes created and displayed in China, no issue, etc. However, the subject here is subjected to multiple copyright jurisdictions, China and the States. FoP (and again, usually is a subset of the copyright laws) in China may allow for such treatment, but not the copyright laws (not FoP) in the States. Robertsky (talk) 22:59, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Robertsky if we are going to follow the U.S. law, then America is no better than China in terms of greater user rights. See COM:FOP US: there is no freedom of panorama in the U.S. for any copyrighted artistic work in public except architecture (see also {{FoP-US}} and w:en:Freedom of panorama#United States). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 23:33, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
- Regarding the issue of permanence, see the above argument by Snowmanonahoe. Regarding US copyright law, that's completely irrelevant per Commons:Freedom of panorama#Choice of law. Commons practice is to allow FoP works under the most lenient applicable law, because applying the law of every country is impossible. If we required that FoP files were compliant with US law, we would have no images of statues, murals, or public art anywhere. Di (they-them) (talk) 21:55, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- This has nothing to do with fair use. Fair use isn't even allowed on Commons so I'm not sure why you're bringing it up. The tag clearly states that a work may be used without permission from, and without payment of remuneration to, the copyright owner, provided that the name of the author and the title of the work shall be indicated. This isn't about fair use at all, it's just the fact that it isn't a copyright violation. Di (they-them) (talk) 17:12, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Di (they-them): Chinese FOP does not appear to be lenient as it may seem. Temporary works are no longer bound for Chinese FOP. We should also not ignore the Supreme People's Court opinion from 1995, as it reflects to what courts in China will follow should a re-user be slapped with lawsuit from artists of billboards. Ping @Teetrition: regarding the nature of Chinese FOP as interpreted in courts, as User:Di (they-them) seems to contest the application of court interpretations here on Commons. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:57, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. There's no doubt that this is a temporary work, plus, this is a 2D work. Snowmanonahoe said that the Supreme People's Court opinion is from 1995 and may be out of date, the Copyright Law of PRC was amended many times and the opinion may no longer apply. However, the provision of FOP was amended only once in 2020, since the establishment of this Law in 1990, the only amendment to the FOP provision is to delete the "outdoor" limitation which means it's also possible to photograph indoor works and upload them to internet. And, as to the interpretation of the reply in 1995, the advertiser may be pleased that one uses his advertisement to promote the movie on the poster, but I think no copyright holder will be pleased that one uses the character (spider man) on this poster to promote goods of other brands.
- Previous DR for reference: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mao Zedong portrait.jpg - not a temporary work but a 2D work showing no panoramic view. Teetrition (talk) 10:05, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Teetrition If Snowmanonahoe said nothing wrong above, then I'd re-claim {{PD-PRC-exempt}} applies to that portrait and hence, I'd love to nominate for undeletion, do you have against comments? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry but what is "that portrait"? Do you mean Mao Zedong's portrait in Tian'anmen Square?
I have no idea why you referred to that portrait here (instead of other DR pages) andas you can see I do not agree with Snowmanonahoe's opinion above. Teetrition (talk) 13:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC) - And, feel free to do anything you want. Other users will vote and admins will judge. Teetrition (talk) 13:19, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry but what is "that portrait"? Do you mean Mao Zedong's portrait in Tian'anmen Square?
- @Teetrition If Snowmanonahoe said nothing wrong above, then I'd re-claim {{PD-PRC-exempt}} applies to that portrait and hence, I'd love to nominate for undeletion, do you have against comments? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete, Chinese FOP for commercial uses hardly applies to 2D works thanks to the existing court rulings. This is just identical to COM:FOP Germany, where German courts drastically set stifling limits to the German freedom of panorama legal right. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:03, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per Teetrition and Jwilz, Chinese courts are clear on this. --Abzeronow (talk) 15:54, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
The station was built in 1993. This art is unfree until at earliest 2064. This art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:28, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Abzeronow (talk) 15:55, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Großhadern
[edit]Creator was Paolo Nestler, how died in 2010. His art is unfree until 2081. His art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
- File:Munich subway Großhadern.jpg
- File:Munich Subway Station Großhadern 01.jpg
- File:Munich Subway Station Großhadern 02.jpg
Lukas Beck (talk) 16:38, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- This - as well as my other Munich subway pictures tagged for deletion lately - was taken using an official permit by Münchner Verkehrsgesellschaft that included the right to use these pictures afterwards. I am no lawyer but I understand it in a way that allows usage of pictures taken with official permit by domestic authority. --FloSch (talk) 09:11, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- But does the transport company really have copyright claims, or rather the architects? Lukas Beck (talk) 11:32, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- @FloSch: But does that permit valid only for the photographer, or for anyone in the world? That's the freedom that's required in order to keep these. —holly {chat} 16:25, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, needs VRT permission from the copyright holder. --Abzeronow (talk) 17:02, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Georg-Brauchle-Ring
[edit]This station was built in 2003. This art is unfree until at earliest 2074. His art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
- File:Munich subway GBR.jpg
- File:Georg-Brauchle-Ring.JPG
- File:Munich Metro station Georg-Brauchle Ring (general view).jpg
- File:Munich subway station Georg-Brauchle-Ring.JPG
- File:Munich U1 Georg-Brauchle-Ring.jpg
- File:U-Bhf Georg-Brauchle-Ring.jpeg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Lukas Beck (talk) 16:42, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- This - as well as my other Munich subway pictures tagged for deletion lately - was taken using an official permit by Münchner Verkehrsgesellschaft that included the right to use these pictures afterwards. I am no lawyer but I understand it in a way that allows usage of pictures taken with official permit by domestic authority. --FloSch (talk) 09:12, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- But does the transport company really have copyright claims, or rather the architects? Lukas Beck (talk) 11:32, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, needs VRT permission from the copyright holder since it's not covered by FOP. --Abzeronow (talk) 17:04, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Garching
[edit]This station was built in 2006. This art is unfree until at earliest 2077. His art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
Lukas Beck (talk) 16:45, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Renardo la vulpo (talk) 17:36, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- This - as well as my other Munich subway pictures tagged for deletion lately - was taken using an official permit by Münchner Verkehrsgesellschaft that included the right to use these pictures afterwards. I am no lawyer but I understand it in a way that allows usage of pictures taken with official permit by domestic authority. --FloSch (talk) 09:13, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- But does the transport company really have copyright claims, or rather the architects? Lukas Beck (talk) 11:33, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, needs VRT permission from the copyright holder since it's not covered by FOP. --Abzeronow (talk) 17:05, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Garching
[edit]The images were uploaded after the deletion request, but are protected by copyright for the same reason. There is no freedom of panorama for interior shots in Germany.
- File:U-Bahnhof Garching - 2024-03 - p01.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Garching - 2024-03 - p03.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Garching - 2024-03 - p04.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Garching - 2024-03 - p05.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Garching - 2024-03 - p06.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Garching - 2024-03 - p07.jpg
Lukas Beck (talk) 09:30, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Dülferstraße
[edit]Creators were Peter Lanz and Ricarda Dietz. Both are still alive. This art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
- File:Munich subway DF.jpg
- File:Munich subway station Dülferstraße.jpg
- File:München, U-Bahnhof Dülferstraße, 2.jpeg
Lukas Beck (talk) 16:50, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. When I uploaded the picture Commons already had another picture about this object; so I assumed that for some reason (unknown to me) it was alright to publish such pictures. I took care to take the picture from outside the delimited station area but it was still in the pedestrian underpass, so I agree with Lukas' argument that FoP does not apply here. –– Renardo la vulpo (talk) 17:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- I only mean my own picture, München, U-Bahnhof Dülferstraße, 2.jpeg. The picture Munich subway station Dülferstraße.jpg might be cropped and kept, as the right half does not show the station's walls. The picture still violates the prohibition to take pictures within Munich metro stations but this does not concern copyright, though it probably applies to hundreds of WC photos. This was the reason why I took my picture from outside the station area. –– Renardo la vulpo (talk) 17:49, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- This - as well as my other Munich subway pictures tagged for deletion lately - was taken using an official permit by Münchner Verkehrsgesellschaft that included the right to use these pictures afterwards. I am no lawyer but I understand it in a way that allows usage of pictures taken with official permit by domestic authority. --FloSch (talk) 09:13, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- But does the transport company really have copyright claims, or rather the architects? Lukas Beck (talk) 11:33, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- To my understand yes, but as said, I am no lawyer.
- So instead of bulk-deleting pictures that have been on Commons/Wikipedia for decades, maybe some research would have been in Ordner instead. But please go ahead making Wikipedia a little bit less colorful if that feels right to you. I won‘t intervene here or in the other discussions with your plot here and promise to not upload anything anymore in the future. Good bye and see you elsewhere… No worries, I lost interest in doing that there years ago anyway, this plot here is just another dip on top. --FloSch (talk) 10:48, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
- I don't get emotional by that! Sorry! We have clear rules and one of them is, that when we are unsure about copyright, we should delete the files. And if we ever get further information, all images can be undeleted. But thats not my job. Lukas Beck (talk) 12:17, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
- But does the transport company really have copyright claims, or rather the architects? Lukas Beck (talk) 11:33, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, needs VRT permission from the copyright holder since it's not covered by FOP. --Abzeronow (talk) 17:06, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Candidplatz
[edit]The station was built in 1997. This art is unfree until at earliest 2068. This art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
- File:Candidplatz - Flickr - iEiEi.jpg
- File:Candidplatz Subway Station Munich.jpg
- File:Munich 5 Feb 2021 23 40 02 810000.jpeg
- File:Munich 5 Feb 2021 23 40 10 378000.jpeg
- File:Munich subway station Candidplatz.JPG
- File:München - U-Bahn-Bahnhof Candidplatz (Bahnsteig).jpg
- File:München - U-Bahn-Bahnhof Candidplatz (Farbgestaltung).jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Candidplatz2.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Candidplatz5.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Candidplatz6.jpg
- File:U-Bahnhof Candidplatz9.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Lukas Beck (talk) 16:53, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep No work of art can be seen in the images listed. Should the color gradient be meant by "art", the threshold for originality has clearly not been reached. There are numerous colorful subway stations in Munich, Germany and around the world. Rio65trio (talk) 14:20, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: The architecture would still be under copyright, and is not covered by FOP. Would need VRT permission from the copyright holder. --Abzeronow (talk) 21:09, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Given the involvement of non-NASA personel and that it wasn't published in the Hubble websites, but in a copyrighted journal, IMO this image isn't available with a compatible license. C messier (talk) 19:47, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete From what I've been able to deduce, this is a composite image put together from three separate images in the source article. Two of the three images used are Hubble images and are probably fine, but the third is from the Chandra X-ray Observatory and per Category:Chandra images, there could be another party claiming ownership on that image, so per COM:PCP this unfortunately should be deleted. —holly {chat} 22:57, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Abzeronow (talk) 21:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Given the involvement of non-NASA personel and that it wasn't published in the Hubble websites, but in a copyrigthed journal, IMO this image isn't available with a compatible license. C messier (talk) 19:47, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete The background images apparently come from the en:National Radio Astronomy Observatory and while their media use policy says everything on the site is CC-BY-3.0, I couldn't find either of these images there, so there's no guarantee that the license is applicable. —holly {chat} 23:00, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Abzeronow (talk) 21:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Given the involvement of non-NASA personel and that it wasn't published in the Hubble websites, but in a copyrighted journal, IMO this image isn't available with a compatible license. C messier (talk) 19:59, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Two of the three images here are Hubble ones and are probably fine. The topmost one, however, is from the en:Galileo National Telescope, and considering we don't have any photos taken by the telescope in Category:Telescopio Nazionale Galileo, I'm guessing those are copyrighted. —holly {chat} 23:07, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per COM:PCP since one of the images has unknown copyright status. --Abzeronow (talk) 21:11, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: The source indicates a copyright CoffeeEngineer (talk) 21:01, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- I uploaded it after reading the discussion on the Threshold of originality necessary to claim copyright in the United States, which appears to be the relevant jurisdiction in this case. It's words on a black background. The video is certainly copyrighted, but that image serving as promo logo might not be. --Robincantin (talk) 21:41, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- I am not sur about the TOO. There is a cross and a syringe, which is making it quite distinctive. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 07:56, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep as textlogo. Look through COM:TOO US. Various logos that are under COM:TOO in the U.S. are quite distinctive, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:42, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete While I think the text, the cross, and the syringe are below TOO, the speckling effect on the letters puts it over the top. —holly {chat} 22:46, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- I am not sur about the TOO. There is a cross and a syringe, which is making it quite distinctive. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 07:56, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, the sum of the elements discussed put it above the ToO in the US. --Abzeronow (talk) 15:55, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Bencemac as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Probably hoax, could not find any valid source —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, could be out of scope if it is a hoax, but that is not clearly shown. Fits in Category:Hungarian Pengő-Notes (inflation 1946), therefore decided to keep. --Ellywa (talk) 21:45, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Bencemac as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Probably hoax, could not find any valid source —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:23, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, could be out of scope if it is a hoax, but that is not clearly shown. Fits in Category:Hungarian Pengő-Notes (inflation 1946), therefore decided to keep. --Ellywa (talk) 21:46, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: The uploader is not the author CoffeeEngineer (talk) 20:10, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- I'm thinking this is below COM:TOO US but I'd like others' opinions. —holly {chat} 22:39, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- I'm also inclined to believe this is below the ToO in the US. Abzeronow (talk) 21:12, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. This logo fits in the examples on COM:TOO US which are below TOO, so decided to keep. --Ellywa (talk) 21:48, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
