Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2023/08/06
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![33 File:"Minas de Tezontle" DLA.jpg](#File:"Minas_de_Tezontle"_DLA.jpg){kind=link}
_DLA.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
this is not orginal image Milad shah hosseini (talk) 01:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 13:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
This duplicate photo has been uploaded Milad shah hosseini (talk) 02:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 13:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Gksyy (talk) 05:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 13:20, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
실수로 업로도 했습니다 Gksyy (talk) 05:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, empty file page (file had already been deleted by Yann). --Rosenzweig τ 13:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
اشتباه اپلود شد Guardian011 (talk) 09:41, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Guardian011:
Speedy delete per G7, and possibly suppress as this may be a sensitive document. QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 09:52, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Túrelio. --Rosenzweig τ 13:18, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Aleksander Oppenkowski (talk) 10:06, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 13:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
I need to delete it because is logo school so I'm forgot to permission to my school. Chatchai Chotsawat (talk) 12:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: speedy and per nomination. ~ Nahid Talk 12:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope, promotional Ameisenigel (talk) 07:14, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy delete, G10. RodRabelo7 (talk) 07:52, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 08:10, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Nonexistent file. SHB2000 (talk) 00:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: empty file page; files with that name were already deleted multiple times by various admins. I'll protect this file name against recreation. --Rosenzweig τ 13:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Made a mistake with uploading. This has copyright Mr.Nostalgic (talk) 14:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: already deleted by EugeneZelenko. --Rosenzweig τ 17:14, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Copyrighted by Richard. Speedy this AND crops. 200.111.222.227 17:15, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; reverse image search shows multiple publications months before Commons upload (eg [1]). --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Needs permission of Richard Freeda himself and not a user nickname. 200.111.222.227 17:18, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Roman Reigns, November 5, 2022.jpg. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Send a mail of permission from Richard Freeda's own email address. 200.111.222.227 17:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nom and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Roman Reigns, November 5, 2022.jpg. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
Copyviol from https://www.napolimilionaria.it/2016/08/28/ricetta-frittatina-di-pasta-napoletana Holapaco77 (talk) 10:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- NON c'è nessuna violazione di copyright. Si vada a vedere il link del sito. L'ho pubblicato con la corretta licenza e specificando il nome del proprietario del file.
- Rimuovere subito la richiesta di cancellazione. SkorpioDecano (talk) 14:06, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- @SkorpioDecano: Here on Commons you are supposed to write in english, so everybody can understand. Website napolimilionaria.it is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 (attribution-non commercial-no derivative works). Therefore it'incompatible with Commons:Licensing.--Holapaco77 (talk) 17:16, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, NC-licensed. --Túrelio (talk) 19:12, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- No proof of claimed free license. Link goes to image without information. From look at front page of website, images are NC licensed, not usable on Commons. Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:02, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Bonjour. J'ai trouvé cette photo sur GBIF indiquée sous licence CC BY NC 4;0. Je l'ai importée Dans Commons en indiquant son auteur et la source. Si cela pose un problème, merci de m'indiquer lequel et si l'il faut la supprimer, je ne discuterai pas. Bien sincèrement̴̴̴̴ Arn (talk) 17:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Arn: Pardon, NC n'est pas autorisé sur Commons. Merci pour votre attention. "Wikimedia Commons n’accepte pas les justifications Fair use : voir Commons:Fair use. De même les medias exclusivement sous licences « non commerciales uniquement » (comme la CC BY-NC-SA) ne sont pas acceptés." - Commons:Licensing/fr. Salutations -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:22, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Bonjour. J'ai trouvé cette photo sur GBIF indiquée sous licence CC BY NC 4;0. Je l'ai importée Dans Commons en indiquant son auteur et la source. Si cela pose un problème, merci de m'indiquer lequel et si l'il faut la supprimer, je ne discuterai pas. Bien sincèrement̴̴̴̴ Arn (talk) 17:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: NC licenses. De même les medias exclusivement sous licences « non commerciales uniquement » (comme la CC BY-NC-SA) ne sont pas acceptés. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
97 kb, no metadata - probably copyright violation Xocolatl (talk) 18:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- I think it goes to COM:SD#F10 or COM:SD#G10 Wutkh (talk) 22:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Personal photo by non-contributor (F10) --Wutsje 23:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Personal photo by non-Wikipedian (sock puppet): out of scope. --Karim talk to me :)..! 14:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy delete, I’m tired of seeing this face. RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:18, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 08:31, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Personal Photo: out of the scope Michel Bakni (talk) 08:29, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
Delete Per previous nomination. --Karim talk to me :)..! 09:56, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Personal photo by non-contributors (F10). --Эlcobbola talk 18:50, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
File:The Arm-co-operator, September 1953 - DPLA - 1e7808ec515b093b439f004ea64b23d8 (page 4).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Image contains copyrighted characters (Donald Duck, Blondie, etc.) in comics that may have prior publication. Based on the characters alone, the earliest this could be undeleted is 2043, but it could be as long as 2049 (95 + 1 years after 1953). (Oinkers42) (talk) 13:31, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
- Was this particular cartoon renewed? Character copyrights only prevent you from creating new works of the character. If the old work has not been renewed the old image is still in the public domain. See the lawsuit involving Sherlock Holmes and James Bond where elements and traits of the character that appear in later works, still under copyright, cannot be used in new works. --RAN (talk) 16:21, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
- First off, I am unsure if these comics were renewed. The original magazine they were a part of was, presumably, not though. As for the character copyright, one of the attributes of Commons is that you have to be able to make a derivative work of the image, which character copyrights would cause problems with (also see Commons:Deletion requests/File:The Mad Doctor (1933).webm). (Oinkers42) (talk) 18:02, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
- Delete It's more than new works -- they can also prevent you from further distribution of derivative works that have expired, if the underlying part is still under copyright. Courts have ruled that way more than once. The copyright of the original work does not lose any rights it had with respect to a derivative work, if the additional copyright in the derivative happens to expire first. Carl Lindberg (talk) 03:47, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, discussion and per COM:PRP. No Evidence these particular characters are in PD. --Ellywa (talk) 18:28, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
File:The Arm-co-operator, September 1953 - DPLA - 1e7808ec515b093b439f004ea64b23d8 (page 4).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
This image was deleted as COPYVIO in December of last year but seems to have been re-uploaded by the DPLA bot even though nothing has changed about the copyright status since then. So it should be deleted again for the same reason as last time. Adamant1 (talk) 20:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Yeah, looks like the DLPA bot simply checks to see if a file has been uploaded, and can re-upload. It needs to check to see if a file was previously deleted, or maintain a list of deleted images, to avoid re-uploads. Someone just mentioned this to the maintainer, I think. Carl Lindberg (talk) 21:22, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- I was actually thinking that myself. I'm glad someone at least mentioned it to the maintainer. There's no reason the bot should be re-uploading previous deleted images. --Adamant1 (talk) 21:25, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think this needs a discussion. I self-requested speedy deletion (G7) with the bot account, so hopefully it will get taken care of. This just isn't a situation the bot code handles yet. Dominic (talk) 15:00, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: G7. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:30, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by inappropriate username
[edit]No reverse image hits, but user uploaded another image that was a copyvio + no metadata on 3/4, so probably copyvios.
- File:SU18BT2020.jpg
- File:NG2652022 Interior back.jpg
- File:NG2652022 Interior front.jpg
- File:WienCitaroCockpit.jpg
—Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Given the account, no need to wait. --Yann (talk) 19:10, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: The uploader is not the author CoffeeEngineer (talk) 00:27, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- @CoffeeEngineer: Delete, there's literally a copyright symbol in the file name. QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 11:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete 20 upper 20:31, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 09:26, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Suspected copyright violation. I believe the uploader misrepresented copyright by uploading an image they found on the internet and giving the hot link as the "source" and presenting it as CC-BY-SA upon upload. When I visit the source's root URL at https://ethnicelebs.com/, it says "all rights reserved" and when I reverse search Google, the same image comes up in Alarmy stock photo. The image file name from link suggests the photo so from 2017. The upload to Commons was in March 2023. There's no evidence suggesting the source is free for all to use. Graywalls (talk) 09:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Graywalls: Delete per nom, it's definitely license laundering QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 10:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by EugeneZelenko. --Rosenzweig τ 11:03, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Claimed to be own work but likely a screen grab from a broadcast given the black bars and this. Whpq (talk) 00:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
According to w:zh:善法寺#歷史沿革, the statue was erected in the early 1980s. This makes it possibly under artist's copyright, and may be eligible for copyright in the United States thanks to COM:URAA. Even if this becomes PD in Taiwan, this will remain copyrighted in the U.S. for many more years and the photo can only be undeleted after U.S. copyright expires. As there is no commercial freedom of panorama in Taiwan, U.S. copyright on Taiwanese monuments cannot be ignored. See Category:Slovenian deletion requests/deleted, which includes some cases involving undeleted images of Slovenian monuments that were re-deleted again because the U.S. copyright has not expired yet. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative work. Yann (talk) 08:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative work. Yann (talk) 08:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative work. Yann (talk) 08:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Random share button. Not COM:INUSE and probably globally replaced by an svg. No COM:EDUSE. Out of scope. Matr1x-101 {user - talk? - useless contributions} 09:06, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE personal photo, unused, of a person with ~30 enwiki edits so far. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:40, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:09, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Painting presumably by artist Dante Lazzaroni Andino, d. 1995, too recent to be PD; no evidence why uploader would be copyright holder with right to license Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:05, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:09, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Art by artist Dante Lazzaroni Andino, d. 1995, too recent to be PD; no evidence why uploader would be copyright holder with right to license -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:09, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Art by artist Dante Lazzaroni Andino, d. 1995, too recent to be PD; no evidence why uploader would be copyright holder with right to license -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
![16:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2023/08/06#c-Infrogmation-20230806160800-File:"Minas_de_Tezontle"_DLA.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
![08:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2023/08/06#c-Krd-20230813081000-File:"Minas_de_Tezontle"_DLA.jpg){kind=link}
Art by artist Dante Lazzaroni Andino, d. 1995, too recent to be PD; no evidence why uploader would be copyright holder with right to license -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Art presumably by artist Dante Lazzaroni Andino, d. 1995, too recent to be PD; no evidence why uploader would be copyright holder with right to license -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
_DLA.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_DLA.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
COM:DW -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:10, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
_DLA.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
_DLA.jpg){kind=link}
Art by artist Dante Lazzaroni Andino, d. 1995, too recent to be PD; no evidence why uploader would be copyright holder with right to license -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:10, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Art by artist Dante Lazzaroni Andino, d. 1995, too recent to be PD; no evidence why uploader would be copyright holder with right to license -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
COM:DW -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:18, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
COM:DW, 1984 document of Honduras, no evidence of free license nor that uploader is the copyright holder Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:22, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope "test" file. Rosenzweig τ 13:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Deleted: already deleted by Magog the Ogre. --Rosenzweig τ 09:57, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
NoFoP, as per Category:Palace of the Parliament of Romania - Chainwit. (talk) 03:55, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:14, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 2806:101E:A:4878:A417:5B7E:DAC9:CAFB as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: Very poor quality. Agreed, out of COM:SCOPE. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Yeah, I don't think quality is a speedy deletion reason, but this image absolutely should be deleted on that basis. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:14, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete as very poor quality without compensating importance. (Also agree that tagging as "Speedy" was a dubious tactic.) -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:39, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete 20 upper 20:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:14, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Claimed to be own work but with an author name supplied that is not the uploader. Given the other copyvios where own work was claimed but was copied form Facebook, this is likely not the uploader's work. Whpq (talk) 00:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete 20 upper 20:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:15, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
original uploader requesting deletion Rohini (talk) 07:40, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 15:38, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Bad quality image. I am the uploader and photographer. I cannot improve the image or go back to shoot another one.- Rohini (talk) 03:40, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. What the uploader said. The machine is in a dark room, hidden behind a translucent screen, and the camera flash is reflecting off the screen - there's very little detail visible. Better photos of this type of equipment are available in Category:Injection molding. Omphalographer (talk) 05:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per norm. 20 upper 20:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
File:HK SKD TKO 西貢 Sai Kung District 將軍澳 TKO 康城路1號 Lohas Park Road Montara LOHAS Park 日出康城商場 The Lohas Shopping Mall shop Fresh Supermarket korean food instant noodle March 2022 Px2.jpg
[edit]
Instant noodle packages of Korea. Solomon203 (talk) 04:01, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Keep No valid reason to delete. 20 upper 20:38, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Not own work. Originally published here: https://img9.irna.ir/old/Image/1393/13930131/2673139/N2673139-3825128.jpg Streamline8988 (talk) 04:17, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete 20 upper 20:40, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
File:HK 上環 Sheung Wan 德輔道中 248 Des Voeux Road Central 東協商業大廈 Tung Hip Commercial Building shop 浦和日本料理 Restaurant November 2022 Px3 02.jpg
[edit]
Copyrighted food menu in Hong Kong. Solomon203 (talk) 04:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
File:HK 上環 Sheung Wan 德輔道中 248 Des Voeux Road Central 東協商業大廈 Tung Hip Commercial Building shop 浦和日本料理 Restaurant November 2022 Px3 03.jpg
[edit]
Copyrighted food menu in Hong Kong. Solomon203 (talk) 04:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 荷李活道 Hollywood Road 閣麟街 Cochrane Street shop Cali-Mex Bar Restaurant menu November 2022 Px3 02.jpg
[edit]
Copyrighted food menu in Hong Kong. Solomon203 (talk) 04:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central 德輔道中 88 Des Voeux Road Central shop 大龍燒鵝 siu mei restaurant menu November 2022 Px3 02.jpg
[edit]
Copyrighted food menu in Hong Kong. Solomon203 (talk) 04:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
File:HK 中環 Central Stanley Street 閣麟街 Cochrane Street 小雨點餐廳 Little Rain Restaurant menu November 2022 Px3 02.jpg
[edit]
Copyrighted food menu in Hong Kong. Solomon203 (talk) 04:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:17, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Copyrighted food menu in Hong Kong. Solomon203 (talk) 04:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:17, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
copyright violation (no proof of this license) Mateus2019 (talk) 05:17, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete 20 upper 20:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:17, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Unused personal photo. Solomon203 (talk) 06:38, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete 20 upper 20:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:17, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Images of Monument to Jorge Canning in Buenos Aires
[edit]The sculpture is a work of Alberto Lagos (1885-1960) and located in Argentina where freedom of panorama applies only to buildings. Thus, the monument is protected under copyright in Argentina and all images of it should be deleted from Commons. We can undelete them in 2031 when it enters in the public domain.
- File:Homenaje a Jorge Canning 1060195.JPG
- File:Homenaje a Jorge Canning 1060197.JPG
- File:Homenaje a Jorge Canning 1060201.JPG
- File:Homenaje a Jorge Canning 1060196.JPG
- File:Homenaje a Jorge Canning C660.jpg
- File:WLM 2013 - Monumento a Jorge Canning 3.jpg
- File:WLM 2013 - Monumento a Jorge Canning 2.jpg
Günther Frager (talk) 12:17, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:18, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Dina Konopleva
[edit]unclear notability, probably F10. Personal photos by non-contributors and/or G10. Files and pages created as advertisements
Emu (talk) 12:18, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Appears to be non-notable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:16, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:18, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kitithat Phengaro (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope. Please also consider File:ArtAndFeminism 2017 Livrustkammaren 06.jpg's revision.
- File:FB IMG 1689527304411 Prince.JacK.Kitithat.Phengaro.jpg
- File:King's.API.lnc.LLC.jpg
- File:JacK Kitithat Phengaro.jpg
- File:Kitithat Phengaro.jpg
Bencemac (talk) 12:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. They are personal photos from a non-contributor. Günther Frager (talk) 12:55, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete I suppose them to be out of scope. --TKsdik8900 (talk) 11:37, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:18, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope, personal unused image. 80.62.116.107 12:42, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete description of the file, and the activity of the uploader suggest the intention of the file was vandalism. Günther Frager (talk) 13:03, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:19, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope, personal unused image. 80.62.116.107 12:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete file description and the activity of the uploader suggest the intention was to vandalize. Günther Frager (talk) 13:05, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:19, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope, personal unused image. 80.62.116.107 12:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:19, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope, personal unused image. 80.62.116.107 12:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete likely uploaded for vandalism purposes (categorized under "Cool kid"). Günther Frager (talk) 13:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:19, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Monumento al Guardacosta
[edit]The sculpture is a work of Andrés Mirwald (1943-2016) and it is located in Argentina where freedom of panorama is valid only for building. Thus, it is protected under copyright in Argentina until 2087.
- File:Monumento al Guardacosta Puerto Madero.jpg
- File:Homenaje al Guardacosta.2.yz.jpg
- File:Homenaje al Guardacosta.1.yz.jpg
- File:Homenaje al Guardacostas.jpg
- File:WLM2013 HomenajeGuardacostas (1).JPG
- File:Monumento Guardacostas Puerto Madero.jpg
- File:Puerto Madero - Monumento Guardacostas.jpg
- File:Monumento al Guardacostas Guerra de las Islas Malvinas Puerto Madero 01.jpg
- File:Monumento al Guardacostas Guerra de las Islas Malvinas Puerto Madero 02.jpg
- File:ID C530 Homenaje al guardacostas 5112.jpg
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Günther Frager (talk) 13:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:19, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Monument to Rubén Dario in Buenos Aires
[edit]The sculpture is a work of José Fioravanti.(1896-1977) and it is located in Argentina where freedom of panorama is valid only for buildings. It is is protected under copyright in Argentina until 2045. Thus, we should remove all photographs of this monument from Commons.
- File:Plaza Rubén Darío, Buenos Aires.jpg
- File:Monumento Canto a la Argentina, homenaje a Rubén Darío 1.JPG
- File:Monumento Canto a la Argentina, homenaje a Rubén Darío 2.JPG
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío 1060242.JPG
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío 3.JPG
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío 2.JPG
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío 1060238.JPG
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío 1060240.JPG
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío 1060244.JPG
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío 1060243.JPG
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío 1060236.JPG
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío 1060239.JPG
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío 1060237.JPG
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío 1060241.JPG
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío 1060245.JPG
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío 1060246.JPG
- File:Monumento a Ruben Dario C670.jpg
- File:Monumento a Rubén Darío.JPG
- File:Monumento Canto a la Argentina de Rubén Darío -Detalle Rostro.jpg
- File:Monumento Canto a la Argentina de Rubén Darío -Detalle Pegaso.jpg
- File:Monumento Canto a la Argentina de Rubén Darío -Detalle Escultura principal.jpg
Günther Frager (talk) 13:59, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:19, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope image only described as "Snnsndndnd". Rosenzweig τ 14:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Selfie/personal file of a non-contributor; outside of COM:SCOPE. Marbletan (talk) 14:20, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:20, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Balete Drive
[edit]There is no freedom of panorama in the Philippines. The building at the corner of Balete Drive and Campanilla Street looks "old" but per timelapse feature of Google Earth, the building wasn't existing on the site way back July 2001 and August 2004. Likely recent and its architect isn't yet dead for more than 50 years.
- File:7926Balete Drive Quezon City Landmarks 22.jpg
- File:7926Balete Drive Quezon City Landmarks 24.jpg
- File:7926Balete Drive Quezon City Landmarks 25.jpg
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:15, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:20, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Monument to Raoul Wallenberg in Argentina
[edit]The sculpture is authored by Philip Jackson (b. 1944) and it is located in Argentina where freedom of panorama is valid only for buildings. There are several replicas of this sculpture around the world, the most famous is perhaps the one in London. The photos on this DR are for the replica in Argentina.
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060264.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060266.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060258.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060254.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060259.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060269.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060268.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060263.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060262.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060270.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060255.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060267.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060265.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060271.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060261.JPG
- File:Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 1060257.JPG
- File:WLM 2013 - Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 2.jpg
- File:WLM 2013 - Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg 3.jpg
- File:WLM 2013 - Monumento a Raoul Wallenberg.jpg
- File:WLM2013 MonumentoRWallenberg (1).JPG
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Günther Frager (talk) 14:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:20, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Monument to Ramón Falcón
[edit]The monument was made by Alberto Lagos (1885-1960) and it is located in Buenos Aires where there is no freedom of panorama for non-architectural works. The copyright in Argentina is 70 years pma and therefore Lagos' work is still protected. These files can be undeleted in 2031.
- File:Monumento a ramon falcon.jpg
- File:Homenaje a Ramón Falcón y Juan Alberto Lartigau.JPG
- File:Homenaje a Ramón L. Falcón 2.JPG
- File:Homenaje a Ramón L. Falcón y Juan Alberto Lartigau.jpg
- File:Homenaje a Ramón L. Falcón y Juan Alberto Lartigau 1060138.JPG
- File:Homenaje a Ramón L. Falcón y Juan Alberto Lartigau 1060135.JPG
- File:Homenaje a Ramón L. Falcón y Juan Alberto Lartigau 1060137.JPG
- File:Homenaje a Ramón L. Falcón y Juan Alberto Lartigau 1060136.JPG
- File:Homenaje a Ramón L. Falcón y Juan Alberto Lartigau 1060139.JPG
- File:Homenaje a Ramón L. Falcón y Juan Alberto Lartigau 1060134.JPG
- File:Buenos Aires - Recoleta - Homenaje a Falcón en Plaza Ramón J. Cárcano 1.JPG
- File:Buenos Aires - Recoleta - Homenaje a Falcón en Plaza Ramón J. Cárcano 2.JPG
- File:Ramón Falcón.JPG
- File:Ramón Lorenzo Falcón.JPG
- File:Homenaje a Ramón L. Falcón.JPG
- File:Homenaje a Ramon Falcon.jpg
- File:R Falcon C662.jpg
- File:WLM2013 HomenajeFalcon (1).JPG
- File:WLM2013 HomenajeFalcon (2).JPG
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Günther Frager (talk) 15:12, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:21, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Another series of COM:PENIS
—Teles «Talk to me ˱C L @ S˲» 15:14, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:21, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
What? 27 KB own work?186.174.221.186 23:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:23, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Mirando desde el Altiplano este chaval parece totalmente out of scope. 186.174.221.186 23:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete it is even SD F10 as it is a photo of a minor. Günther Frager (talk) 23:38, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:23, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
F10 en piscina 186.174.221.186 23:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete it is even SD as it is a photo of a minor. Günther Frager (talk) 23:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:23, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Tomas deja de subir tus imágenes, papu! 186.174.221.186 23:31, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete it is even SD as it is a photo of a minor. Günther Frager (talk) 23:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:22, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Papu es F10. 186.174.221.186 23:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete it is even SD as it is a photo of a minor. Günther Frager (talk) 23:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:22, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Very poor file whith no educational value
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:22, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Low resolution image missing full EXIF data, dubious claim of own work CoffeeEngineer (talk) 07:18, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Low resolution image missing full EXIF data, dubious claim of own work CoffeeEngineer (talk) 07:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Low resolution image missing full EXIF data, dubious claim of own work CoffeeEngineer (talk) 07:31, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Bogus license. No evidence of a free license or public domain. Yann (talk) 07:48, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete 20 upper 20:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Derivative work. Yann (talk) 08:10, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Yann: Delete per COM:TOYS QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 10:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
File:HK ML 半山區 Mid-levels 般咸道 1 Bonham Road 嘉威花園 Cartwright Gardens shop Wellcome Supermarket goods Kitchen tissue August 2020 SS2.jpg
[edit]
COM:PACKAGE Solomon203 (talk) 09:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
File:HK ML 半山區 Mid-levels 般咸道 62 Bonham Road Yee Ga Court shop Wellcome Supermarket goods Kitchen tissue August 2020 SS2 01.jpg
[edit]
COM:PACKAGE Solomon203 (talk) 09:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
out of scope HeminKurdistan (talk) 10:59, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
out of scope HeminKurdistan (talk) 11:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. Unused logo of questionable notability.
Netora (talk) 11:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Oos junk Dronebogus (talk) 11:02, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
out of scope uploads for self-promotion
HeminKurdistan (talk) 11:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete should be speedy --Emu (talk) 12:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:32, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
EXIF shows Yasin Mohammadi is the copyright holder. No permission.
HeminKurdistan (talk) 11:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Photograph by Aria Jafari. Needs permission. HeminKurdistan (talk) 12:02, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Photograph by Reza Saeidi Pour, without being available on a freely-licensed source. Needs permission. HeminKurdistan (talk) 12:02, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Photograph by Aria Jafari. Needs permission HeminKurdistan (talk) 12:03, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
files contain "google maps" category. are they copyvio from google maps street wiev?
----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 12:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Questionable claim of authorship. All of the user's other uploads are copyvios.
- File:พระพุทธรูปปางนาคปรกองค์ใหญ่วัดทุ่งหลวง.jpg
- File:Chumphon Kanchana.jpg
- File:หลวงพ่อเปี่ยม.jpg
- File:Bang Khan.jpg
Paul_012 (talk) 03:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 12:43, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Editordeportivovzla (talk · contribs)
[edit]out of project scope images, looks like promotional, low resolution and no metadata images(copyvio?), for File:Gino Rossi Fala.jpg photo of paper and not notable?,
- File:Paoli Oficial - publicidad 09.jpg
- File:Paoli oficial - publicidad 08.jpg
- File:Paoli oficial - publicidad 07.jpg
- File:Paoli Oficial - publicidad 05.jpg
- File:Paoli oficial - publicidad 099.jpg
- File:Paoli gol2.jpg
- File:Paoli la victoria.jpg
- File:Paoli entrenado.png
- File:Paoli conferencia.jpg
- File:Paolo Rossi FC.jpg
- File:UPEL campeones 2015 - Paoli Campeón.jpg
- File:Sub15 la victoria.jpg
- File:Paoli y Belinda.jpg
- File:Jesús Urdaneta.jpg
- File:Ana Rossi.jpg
- File:Gino Rossi Fala.jpg
- File:Rossi 2016 - liga futsal.jpg
- File:Paoli - fundagad.jpg
- File:Paoli oficial 02.jpg
- File:Paoli oficial 03.jpg
- File:Paoli el italiano.jpg
- File:Paoli il italiano.jpg
- File:Paoli il italiano mia vita.jpg
- File:Paoli Grabando.jpg
- File:Paoli - publicidad 04.jpg
- File:Paoli - publicidad 03.jpg
- File:Paoli - publicidad 02.jpg
- File:Paoli - publicidad 01.jpg
- File:AUTOGRAFO PAOLI ROSSI.png
- File:Paoli oficial - italiano.jpg
- File:Paoli oficial -99.jpg
- File:Kye Letal.jpg
- File:Paoli.jpg
- File:Paoli y Jimmi.jpg
- File:Paoli y Fans.jpg
- File:Paoli y Jimmi ft Lito y Jaykris.jpg
- File:Paoli y Ender.jpg
- File:Paoli y Ender ft Fans.jpg
- File:Paoli y Ender ft Bacanos.jpg
- File:Paoli oficial.jpg
- File:Los magnates.jpg
- File:Pao y Jim.jpg
----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 12:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Screenshot from television program HeminKurdistan (talk) 12:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
WhatsApp file, not own work HeminKurdistan (talk) 12:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
File:HK WC 灣仔 Wan Chai 莊士頓道 Johnston Road shop real estate property agent window display sign January 2022 Px3.jpg
[edit]
copyrighted posters in Hong Kong. Solomon203 (talk) 13:17, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
out of scope HeminKurdistan (talk) 13:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
out of project scope - self made gif about a non encyclopedically relevant person - long time promo affair Hoyanova (talk) 14:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
out of project scope - self made gif about a non encyclopedically relevant person - long time promo affair Hoyanova (talk) 14:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
out of project scope - self made image about a non encyclopedically relevant person - long time promo affair Hoyanova (talk) 14:20, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 14:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Stamps by Heinz Schillinger
[edit]Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Germany stamps of this country are copyrighted until at least 70 years after the death of the artist. So these images are copyrighted until at least 2,079 since the artist, Heinz Schillinger, died in 2008. If not longer due to the copyright status being renewed by the URAA. Although I'll leave it up to the closing administrator to decide which term should apply.
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1975, MiNr 514.jpg
- File:Böttcher-Briefmarke.jpg
- File:DBP - 200 Jahre Beethoven - 10 Pfennig - 1970.jpg
- File:DBP - 200 Jahre Hegel - 20 Pfennig - 1970.jpg
- File:DBP 1963 401 Jugend Wiedehopf.jpg
- File:DBP 1963 402 Jugend Pirol.jpg
- File:DBP 1963 403 Jugend Gimpel.jpg
- File:DBP 1963 404 Jugend Eisvogel.jpg
- File:DBP 1964 451 Olympia Tokio.jpg
- File:DBP 1971 705 Butterfrauen.jpg
- File:DBP 1971 706 Reiter.jpg
- File:DBP 1971 707 Nussknacker.jpg
- File:DBP 1971 708 Taubenhaus.jpg
- File:DBP 1971 709 Weihnachten.jpg
- File:DBP 1973 764 Briefmarkenausstellung IBRA.jpg
- File:DBP 1973 765 Briefmarkenausstellung IBRA.jpg
- File:DBP 1973 766 Briefmarkenausstellung IBRA.jpg
- File:DBP 1973 767 Briefmarkenausstellung IBRA.jpg
- File:DBP 1973 774 Umweltschutz.jpg
- File:DBP 1973 775 Umweltschutz.jpg
- File:DBP 1973 776 Umweltschutz.jpg
- File:DBP 1973 777 Umweltschutz.jpg
- File:DBP 1973 Block 9 Briefmarkenausstellung IBRA.jpg
- File:DBP 1974 818 Wohlfahrt Blumen.jpg
- File:DBP 1974 819 Wohlfahrt Blumen.jpg
- File:DBP 1974 820 Wohlfahrt Blumen.jpg
- File:DBP 1974 821 Wohlfahrt Blumen.jpg
- File:DBP 1974 824 Weihnachten 1974.jpg
- File:DBP 1975 836 Jugend Lokomotiven.jpg
- File:DBP 1975 837 Jugend Lokomotiven.jpg
- File:DBP 1975 838 Jugend Lokomotiven.jpg
- File:DBP 1975 839 Jugend Lokomotiven.jpg
- File:DBP 1975 866 Tag der Briefmarke.jpg
- File:DBP 1975 867 Wohlfahrt Alpenblumen.jpg
- File:DBP 1975 868 Wohlfahrt Alpenblumen.jpg
- File:DBP 1975 869 Wohlfahrt Alpenblumen.jpg
- File:DBP 1975 870 Wohlfahrt Alpenblumen.jpg
- File:DBP 1975 874 Weihnachten 1975.jpg
- File:DBP 1976 877 Hans Sachs.jpg
- File:DBP 1976 878 Lufthansa Junkers F 13.jpg
- File:DBP 1976 879 Bundesverfassungsgericht.jpg
- File:DBP 1976 882 Jugend Olympia.jpg
- File:DBP 1976 883 Jugend Olympia.jpg
- File:DBP 1976 884 Jugend Olympia.jpg
- File:DBP 1976 885 Jugend Olympia.jpg
- File:DBP 1976 903 Tag der Briefmarke.jpg
- File:DBP 1976 904 Wohlfahrt Gartenblumen Phlox.jpg
- File:DBP 1976 905 Wohlfahrt Gartenblumen Ringelblumen.jpg
- File:DBP 1976 906 Wohlfahrt Gartenblumen Zinnien.jpg
- File:DBP 1976 907 Wohlfahrt Gartenblumen Stiefmütterchen.jpg
- File:DBP 1977 931 Jugend Schiffe.jpg
- File:DBP 1977 932 Jugend Schiffe.jpg
- File:DBP 1977 934 Europa Landschaften Rhön.jpg
- File:DBP 1977 935 Europa Landschaften Siebengebirge.jpg
- File:DBP 1977 948 Tag der Briefmarke.jpg
- File:DBP 1977 949 Wohlfahrt Wiesenblumen Kümmel.jpg
- File:DBP 1977 950 Wohlfahrt Wiesenblumen Löwenzahn.jpg
- File:DBP 1977 951 Wohlfahrt Wiesenblumen Roter Klee.jpg
- File:DBP 1977 952 Wohlfahrt Wiesenblumen Wiesensalbei.jpg
- File:DBP 1978 963 Deutsches Museum.jpg
- File:DBP 1978 982 Wohlfahrt Waldblumen Aronstab.jpg
- File:DBP 1978 983 Wohlfahrt Waldblumen Goldnessel.jpg
- File:DBP 1978 984 Wohlfahrt Waldblumen Türkenbund.jpg
- File:DBP 1978 985 Wohlfahrt Waldblumen Leberblümchen.jpg
_1975,_MiNr_514.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Adamant1 (talk) 00:41, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Zu File:DBP 1976 877 Hans Sachs.jpg: Die Abbildungen stammen aus dem 16. Jahrhundert ({{PD-old-100-expired}}), die Schriftzeichen erreichen keine Schöpfungshöhe ({{PD-ineligible}}). Keep. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 07:49, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: most, per nomination. The Hans Sachs drawings are not exact reproductions, but recreations, apparently Schillinger's work, but they follow the original very closely, so I don't think they're sufficiently original for their own copyright. I've therefore kept the Hans Sachs Stamp. A few stamps from 1963 and 1964 will enter the public domain in Germany 70 years after publication (with {{PD-Germany-§134-KUG}}), they can be restored in 2059 and 2060. I've added notes and categories. --Rosenzweig τ 15:03, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Stamps by Heinz Schillinger
[edit]Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Germany stamps of this country are copyrighted until at least 70 years after the death of the artist. So these images are copyrighted until at least 2,079 since the artist, Heinz Schillinger, died in 2008. If not longer due to the copyright status being renewed by the URAA. Although I'll leave it up to the closing administrator to decide which term should apply.
- File:DBP 1986 1274 Jugend Augenoptiker.jpg
- File:DBP 1986 1275 Jugend Maurer.jpg
- File:DBP 1986 1276 Jugend Friseur.jpg
- File:DBP 1986 1277 Jugend Bäcker.jpg
- File:DBP 1987 1315 Jugend Installateur.jpg
- File:DBP 1987 1316 Jugend Zahntechniker.jpg
- File:DBP 1987 1317 Jugend Fleischer.jpg
- File:DBP 1987 1318 Jugend Buchbinder.jpg
- File:DBP 1990 1455-1458-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1990 1455-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1990 1456-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1990 1457-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1990 1458-R-max-und-moritz.JPG
- File:DBP 1990 1484-1487-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1990 1484-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1990 1485-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1990 1486-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1990 1487-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1991 1512-1519-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1991 1512-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1991 1513-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1991 1514-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1991 1515-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1991 1516-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1991 1517-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1991 1518-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1991 1519-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1602-1606-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1602-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1603-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1604-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1605-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1606-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1627-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1630-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1631-1635-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1631-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1632-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1633-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1634-R.JPG
- File:DBP 1992 1635-R.JPG
- File:DBPB 1968 322 Puppe.jpg
- File:DBPB 1968 323 Puppe.jpg
- File:DBPB 1968 324 Puppe.jpg
- File:DBPB 1968 325 Puppe.jpg
- File:DBPB 1969 348 Zinnfigur 1835.jpg
- File:DBPB 1969 349 Zinnfigur 1850.jpg
- File:DBPB 1969 350 Zinnfigur 1850.jpg
- File:DBPB 1969 351 Zinnfigur 1860.jpg
- File:DBPB 1971 412 Kurbelmännchen.jpg
- File:DBPB 1971 413 Ritter auf Pferd.jpg
- File:DBPB 1971 414 Hampelmann.jpg
- File:DBPB 1971 415 Schaukelamme.jpg
- File:Dorfkirche Bochum-Stiepel Briefmarke 2008.jpg
- File:DPAG-2005-1200JahreMagdeburg.jpg
- File:DPAG1998-04-16-MarkgraeflichesOpernhausBayreuth.jpg
- File:DPAG1998-Noerdlingen.jpg
- File:DBP - 200 Jahre Hölderlin - 30 Pfennig - 1970.jpg
- File:Stamp Germany 2002 MiNr2274 Museumsinsel Berlin.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1972, MiNr 435.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1972, MiNr 436.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1972, MiNr 437.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1972, MiNr 438.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1974, MiNr 473.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1974, MiNr 474.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1974, MiNr 475.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1974, MiNr 476.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1974, MiNr 481.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1975, MiNr 488.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1975, MiNr 489.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1975, MiNr 490.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1975, MiNr 491.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1975, MiNr 510.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1975, MiNr 511.jpg
_1972,_MiNr_435.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1972,_MiNr_436.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1972,_MiNr_437.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1972,_MiNr_438.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1974,_MiNr_473.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1974,_MiNr_474.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1974,_MiNr_475.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1974,_MiNr_476.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1974,_MiNr_481.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1975,_MiNr_488.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1975,_MiNr_489.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1975,_MiNr_490.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1975,_MiNr_491.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1975,_MiNr_510.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1975,_MiNr_511.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Adamant1 (talk) 00:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Robert Weemeyer: It's massively rude and just convolutes the discussion to comment inside of someone else's comments, and we aren't suppose to modify each others comments anyway. Plus it's not clear what images your talking about to begin with. So can you just write a single message underneath the nominations and list what files you want kept instead of doing it inline by editing my nomination comments? Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 16:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Zu File:DPAG-2005-1200JahreMagdeburg.jpg: Der Holzschnitt stammt aus dem 15. Jahrhundert ({{PD-old-100-expired}}), die Schriftzeichen erreichen keine Schöpfungshöhe ({{PD-ineligible}}). Keep. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 07:48, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Wiederherstellung meines von Adamant1 kommentarlos gelöschten Diskussionsbeitrages zu File:DBP 1990 1455-1458-R.JPG, File:DBP 1990 1455-R.JPG, File:DBP 1990 1456-R.JPG, File:DBP 1990 1457-R.JPG und File:DBP 1990 1458-R-max-und-moritz.JPG: Die Zeichnungen dieser fünf Dateien stammen aus dem 19. Jahrhundert ({{PD-old-100-expired}}), die Schriftzeichen erreichen keine Schöpfungshöhe ({{PD-ineligible}}). Keep. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 07:58, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: most, per nomination, kept 6 per Robert Weemeyer. --Rosenzweig τ 15:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Stamps by Heinz Schillinger
[edit]Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Germany German stamps are copyrighted until at least 70+ years after the artist's death. In this case the artist, Heinz Schillinger, died in 2008. So the images are copyrighted until at least 2079, if not longer due to their copyright status being renewed by the URAA. Although I'll leave that up to the closing administrator to decide.
- File:DBP 1979 1014 Internationale Verkehrsausstellung IVA.jpg
- File:DBP 1979 1023 Tag der Briefmarke.jpg
- File:DBP 1979 1024 Wohlfahrt Rotbuche.jpg
- File:DBP 1979 1025 Wohlfahrt Stieleiche.jpg
- File:DBP 1979 1026 Wohlfahrt Weißdorn.jpg
- File:DBP 1979 1027 Wohlfahrt Bergkiefer.jpg
- File:DBP 1980 1051 Confessio Augustana.jpg
- File:DBP 1980 1052 Naturschutzgebiete.jpg
- File:DBP 1980 1059 Wohlfahrt Ackerwildkräuter Hornköpfchen.jpg
- File:DBP 1980 1060 Wohlfahrt Ackerwildkräuter Ranken-Platterbse.jpg
- File:DBP 1980 1061 Wohlfahrt Ackerwildkräuter Kornrade.jpg
- File:DBP 1980 1062 Wohlfahrt Ackerwildkräuter Träubelhyazinthe.jpg
- File:DBP 1980 1065 FIP-Kongress für Philatelie und Postgeschichte Kleinbogen.jpg
- File:DBP 1980 1065 FIP-Kongress für Philatelie und Postgeschichte.jpg
- File:DBP 1981 1087 Umweltschutz.jpg
- File:DBP 1981 1090 Jugend Borda-Kreis.jpg
- File:DBP 1981 1091 Jugend Spiegelfernrohr.jpg
- File:DBP 1981 1092 Jugend Binolularmikroskop.jpg
- File:DBP 1981 1093 Jugend Oktant.jpg
- File:DBP 1981 1108 Wohlfahrt Wassernuss.jpg
- File:DBP 1981 1109 Wohlfahrt Seekanne.jpg
- File:DBP 1981 1110 Wohlfahrt Wasserfeder.jpg
- File:DBP 1981 1111 Wohlfahrt Wasserlobelie.jpg
- File:DBP 1982 1150 Wohlfahrt Teehybride.jpg
- File:DBP 1982 1151 Wohlfahrt Floribunda.jpg
- File:DBP 1982 1152 Wohlfahrt Bourbonrose.jpg
- File:DBP 1982 1153 Wohlfahrt Polyantha-Hybride.jpg
- File:DBP 1983 1168 Jugend Reitwagen.jpg
- File:DBP 1983 1169 Jugend NSU.jpg
- File:DBP 1983 1170 Jugend Megola Sport.jpg
- File:DBP 1983 1171 Jugend BMW.jpg
Adamant1 (talk) 04:11, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 18:53, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Stamps by Heinz Schillinger
[edit]Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Germany German stamps are copyrighted until at least 70+ years after the artist's death. In this case the artist, Heinz Schillinger, died in 2008. So the images are copyrighted until at least 2079, if not longer due to their copyright status being renewed by the URAA. Although I'll leave that up to the closing administrator to decide.
- File:DBP 1985 1242 Jugend Draisine Laufmaschine.jpg
- File:DBP 1985 1243 Jugend NSU Germania Hochrad.jpg
- File:DBP 1985 1244 Jugend Kreuzrahmen-Niederrad.jpg
- File:DBP 1985 1245 Jugend Adler-Dreirad.jpg
- File:DBP 1985 1250 Limburger Dom.jpg
- File:DBP 1985 1255 Mophila.jpg
- File:DBP 1985 1255,1256 Mophila.jpg
- File:DBP 1985 1256 Mophila.jpg
- File:DBP 1985 1264 Eisenbahn Johannes Scharrer.jpg
- File:DBP 1986 1268 Automobil.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1975, MiNr 512.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1975, MiNr 513.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1976, MiNr 517.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1976, MiNr 518.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1976, MiNr 519.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1976, MiNr 520.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1976, MiNr 524.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1976, MiNr 525.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1976, MiNr 526.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1976, MiNr 527.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1977, MiNr 544.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1977, MiNr 545.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1977, MiNr 546.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1977, MiNr 547.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1977, MiNr 556.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1977, MiNr 557.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1977, MiNr 558.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1977, MiNr 559.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1978, MiNr 573.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1978, MiNr 574.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1978, MiNr 575.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1978, MiNr 576.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1979, MiNr 607.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1979, MiNr 608.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1979, MiNr 609.jpg
- File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1979, MiNr 610.jpg
_1975,_MiNr_512.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1975,_MiNr_513.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1976,_MiNr_517.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1976,_MiNr_518.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1976,_MiNr_519.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1976,_MiNr_520.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1976,_MiNr_524.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1976,_MiNr_525.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1976,_MiNr_526.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1976,_MiNr_527.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1977,_MiNr_544.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1977,_MiNr_545.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1977,_MiNr_546.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1977,_MiNr_547.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1977,_MiNr_556.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1977,_MiNr_557.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1977,_MiNr_558.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1977,_MiNr_559.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1978,_MiNr_573.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1978,_MiNr_574.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1978,_MiNr_575.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1978,_MiNr_576.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1979,_MiNr_607.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1979,_MiNr_608.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1979,_MiNr_609.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1979,_MiNr_610.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Adamant1 (talk) 04:15, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 18:53, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
Vermerk: File:DBP - Bronzekultwagen - 30 Pfennig - 1976.jpg wurde aktuell zur Schnelllöschung vorgeschlagen. Sollte diese Datei gelöscht werden, so kann auch sie 2079 wiederhergestellt werden. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 08:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
{{Bad name}} Alessiopinna (talk) 10:48, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete: Uploader's request. According to source and author not own work, so unclear copyright status. --Achim55 (talk) 13:15, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per Achim55. --Rosenzweig τ 15:41, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Unused duplicate of File:Табл 02.png (which itself must be in wikitext instead of an image). Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 11:31, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 15:40, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Mickey Mouse is still under copyright; see also Commons:Deletion requests/File:The Mad Doctor (1933).webm. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 18:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- The precedent I went off of was the weird ambiguity around still image depictions. By the same logic, we should delete any images of the Fleischer Superman shorts, this image of Daffy Duck, or even the vast amount of Betty Boop images. Even public domain movies based on copyrighted works like His Girl Friday or It's A Wonderful Life technically still have copyrighted characters, so those images would be deleted. That's my take on it and why I felt ok to upload it.
- this is a tricky one. The image will be ok in January 2024 as it only depicts Mickey, so I guess if it gets deleted it will be undeleted then. MonkeyBBGB (talk) 18:48, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- MonkeyBBGB, what is the ambiguity? Aren't these characters either still under copyright or not? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:59, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- My point is that these characters are. And so those images should also be deleted then. The ambiguity is in the decision to remove some images but not others. Why? MonkeyBBGB (talk) 21:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Have all the other files in question been nominated for deletion? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:15, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Doubtful. MonkeyBBGB (talk) 22:55, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- End of mystery, then. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Doubtful. MonkeyBBGB (talk) 22:55, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Have all the other files in question been nominated for deletion? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:15, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- My point is that these characters are. And so those images should also be deleted then. The ambiguity is in the decision to remove some images but not others. Why? MonkeyBBGB (talk) 21:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- MonkeyBBGB, what is the ambiguity? Aren't these characters either still under copyright or not? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:59, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Per the nominator. Mickey Mouse is still under copyright until at least 2024, or whenever the character enters the public domain. --Adamant1 (talk) 20:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Fair enough. It would be undeleted in 2024 when Mickey Mouse becomes public domain in the United States. MonkeyBBGB (talk) 21:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- would a fair compromise to delete this and instead upload an image of the doctor himself? Since this is the first appearance of him he has been in the public domain since the short lapsed. MonkeyBBGB (talk) 00:06, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- Fair enough. It would be undeleted in 2024 when Mickey Mouse becomes public domain in the United States. MonkeyBBGB (talk) 21:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- If he's public domain, it's no compromise to upload a photo of just him. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:58, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- I meant compromise as in there can still be an image for the page. I'm in favor of deleting this Mickey Mouse image since it will be undeleted in January, 2024.
- The Mad Doctor image is now live on the page. MonkeyBBGB (talk) 13:21, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- If he's public domain, it's no compromise to upload a photo of just him. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:58, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination, can be restored in 2024. --Rosenzweig τ 15:35, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
1) It isn't used in any article except the list of Eurovision flag hearts 2) Germany never participated in Eurovision under this flag 3) It's a needless case of using an extremely offensive symbol that's banned in a bunch of countries 2A02:3033:40C:4054:D4D2:C1B0:6728:9E48 22:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Speedy keep COM:INUSE. "It isn't used in any article except..." is the end of the story as long as it's in use.- The page where it's in use is a Commons gallery page, not a project page. Commons galleries are specifically excepted from COM:INUSE. Omphalographer (talk) 17:07, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Comment Sorry, I misread that as being a Wikipedia page. I'm crossing out my previous comments. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:26, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete: It's simply offending bullshit lacking COM:EDUSE. ESC started in 1956, thus older flags are nonsense. --Achim55 (talk) 05:59, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
OK, remove it from the article where it's in use, but you know very well that no content arguments trump COM:INUSE.-- Ikan Kekek (talk)
- Delete. Both offensive and historically nonsensical. Omphalographer (talk) 23:42, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, discussion. --Rosenzweig τ 15:20, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Files in Category:Albert André
[edit]The French artist Albert André died in 1954, so these works of art are not in the public domain in France yet, and the files should be deleted. They can be restored in 2025 (no URAA problem as far as I can determine).
- File:1913 Albert Andre Portrait de Renoir.JPG
- File:1919 Albert André Renoir peignant.JPG
- File:2010 Albert Andre Jardin Renoir.JPG
- File:Albert andré, place des batignolles, parigi, 1893.jpg
- File:Albert André.png
Rosenzweig τ 20:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — Racconish 💬 05:08, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
- Undeleted Now 2025 in France. Abzeronow (talk) 00:53, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
This page from a 1905 French publication features paintings by various painters. The last of them to die was en:Jean Puy, who died in 1960. So this is not in the public domain in France yet, and the file should be deleted. It can be restored in 2031. Rosenzweig τ 21:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — Racconish 💬 04:54, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Fictional and out of scope N Panama 84534 01:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, OOS non-notable fiction. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 14:03, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
copyright violation: https://www.emmys.com/awards/nominees-winners/2001/outstanding-supporting-actress-in-a-miniseries-or-a-movie Xocolatl (talk) 10:17, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 18:08, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
copyright violation: https://en.mediamass.net/people/tammy-blanchard Xocolatl (talk) 10:18, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 18:09, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
While a pretty harmless piece of satire this could easily be mistaken for disinformation and is really just out of scope Dronebogus (talk) 10:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete. Out of scope. Commons is not a place for user generated memes or jokes. Günther Frager (talk) 13:16, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 18:10, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of scope, personal unused image. 80.62.116.107 12:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Captain-tucker (talk) 18:10, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
Possible above COM:TOO Wutkh (talk) 22:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, because it's in the UK. Delete per COM:TOO UK. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:07, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Red-tailed hawk. --Rosenzweig τ 12:40, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation? The uploader is Iv9876, claiming this is his/her own work. The photographer is Rob Fritsen according to the Exif data. I do not see anything that points out that both are the same person and I do not see a VRT ticket. JopkeB (talk) 08:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Same for:
- File:Klokken van de wereld.jpg, also by Rob Fritsen
- File:Springcarillon.jpg, also by Rob Fritsen
- File:Astronomisch uurwerk.jpg, also by Rob Fritsen
- File:18e eeuwse Klokkengieterij - Museum Klok & Peel 2001.jpg also by Rob Fritsen
- File:Mammoet in de Peel.jpg also by Rob Fritsen
- File:Wolf in de Peel.jpg also by Rob Fritsen
- File:71I0073 16-9.jpg also by Rob Fritsen, and its duplicate File:71I0073.jpg
- File:Museumtuin en museumterras.jpg, photographer = Cor vd Ven
--JopkeB (talk) 08:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Can you help me change this? When uploading the photos, I could not enter any other name than my own. Both Rob and Cor work as colleagues at the museum. 2A02:A440:D805:1:3CFA:4792:FF6B:48E8 14:27, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Beste Ida 2A02:A440:D805:1:3CFA:4792:FF6B:48E8. Het probleem is, dat deze foto's zijn ge-upload terwijl de uploader een ander lijkt te zijn dan de fotograaf. Hierdoor heeft het in ieder geval de schijn tegen wat betreft auteursrechtenschending. Commons is streng op auteursrechten. Een uploader mag alleen zijn/haar eigen foto's uploaden, niet die van iemand anders, tenzij er een mail naar Commons wordt gestuurd waarin de fotograaf toestemming geeft om de foto's op Commons te plaatsen. Alle informatie daarover (wat er in de mail moet staan, aan welk e-mail adres de mail moet worden gestuurd, e.d.) staat op Commons:Volunteer_Response_Team/nl. Als het museum de auteursrechten heeft afgekocht (voor alle doeleinden, ook voor commerciële en het maken van aanpassingen, door de hele wereld, ook buiten het museum en buiten Wikipedia), dan kan de daartoe bevoegde functionaris via een e-mail adres van het museum de mail sturen, bij voorkeur met bewijs daarvan.
- NB-1 Dit geldt ook voor de twee foto's op Commons:Deletion requests/File:Museum vanuit de lucht med-res.jpg.
- NB-2 Elke afzonderlijke fotograaf moet één mail sturen, met daarin de betreffende foto('s) vermeld (met links). JopkeB (talk) 14:34, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Daar ga ik voor zorgen.
- Hartelijk dank voor de hulp.
- groet, Ida 2A02:A440:D805:1:3CFA:4792:FF6B:48E8 14:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- De mail is verzonden als besproken. Ik hoor graag of dit voldoende is.
- groet, Ida 2A02:A440:D805:1:895:B404:D76D:354A 15:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Ticket:2023080710008403 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 16:00, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Krd: Is this ticket also for the two files mentioned on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Museum vanuit de lucht med-res.jpg? JopkeB (talk) 02:37, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Wolf in de Peel.jpg” under ticket:2023080710008403. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:00, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Mammoet in de Peel.jpg” under ticket:2023080710008403. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:00, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Klokken van de Wereld - India.jpg” under ticket:2023080710008403. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:00, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Klokken van de wereld.jpg” under ticket:2023080710008403. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:00, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Springcarillon.jpg” under ticket:2023080710008403. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:00, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Astronomisch uurwerk.jpg” under ticket:2023080710008403. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:00, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:18e eeuwse Klokkengieterij - Museum Klok & Peel 2001.jpg” under ticket:2023080710008403. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:00, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:71I0073 16-9.jpg” under ticket:2023080710008403. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:01, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:71I0073.jpg” under ticket:2023080710008403. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:01, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
- There is an VRTS email received for “File:71I0073 16-9.jpg” but not processed yet, ticket:2023080710008403. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:01, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted File:Museumtuin en museumterras.jpg (no permission), kept the rest (per permission). —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 14:51, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
Dubious that this is licensed under Creative Commons. RickyCourtney (talk) 19:57, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Túrelio. --Rosenzweig τ 14:42, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Marcielcosta ofc (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal files from a random YouTube creator. No Wikipedia article.
- File:Marciel Costa.png
- File:LIVRO FACA CADA MOMENTO VALER A PENA.jpg
- File:LIVRO TODA MARCA TEM UMA HISTÓRIA.jpg
- File:Serie Toda Marca Tem Uma História.png
- File:WEB TV.jpg
- File:IMG MARCIEL COSTAH.jpg
- File:IMG MARCIEL COSTA.jpg
- File:Dom de ser um youtuber ! o início de uma carreira.jpg
- File:Marciel Costa Tirar Uma fotos Em sua Cidade Natal Codó - Maranhão.jpg
—Teles «Talk to me ˱C L @ S˲» 15:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wutsje 16:37, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Public relations for Alex Fridman and his association. זור987 (talk) 09:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep The video has a VRT ticket attached, so what's the problem here? PaterMcFly (talk) 16:52, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Videos that are made only for public relations, have no place in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an advertising medium. זור987 (talk) 13:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- COM:INUSE is the easy answer for that. PaterMcFly (talk) 13:28, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Videos that are made only for public relations, have no place in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an advertising medium. זור987 (talk) 13:24, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. -- Geagea (talk) 13:55, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:André Derain
[edit]The French artist André Derain died in 1954, so these works of art are not in the public domain in France yet, and the files should be deleted. They can be restored in 2025, unless they are still protected in the US because of the URAA.
- File:André Derain en «El París de Modigliani y sus Contemporáneos» - Museo del Palacio de Bellas Artes, CDMX.jpg
- File:André derain louise et claire 1507523.jpg
- File:André Derain. Forêt en île-de-France. c. 1946-1948. Huile sur toile.jpg
Rosenzweig τ 21:14, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:56, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope homophobic imagery Dronebogus (talk) 10:52, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Judging by the username of the uploader, this file was uploaded solely for trolling purposes. Kelly The Angel (talk) 10:56, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Kritzolina (talk) 15:49, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
1973 painting by a living Dutch artist (born 1944). Would need VRT permission from the artist to host it here. Abzeronow (talk) 20:02, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Ruthven. --Rosenzweig τ 11:04, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Undated French photograph. Would need information on when it was first published and where to determine copyright status. Abzeronow (talk) 20:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete 20 upper 20:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Ruthven. --Rosenzweig τ 11:04, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
File:Louvre - salle 314 - Présentation de la partie Présence et influences phéniciennes et puniques en Méditerranée (1100-100 av. J.-C.).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyvio of Museum label of the Louvre (to much text). Miniwark (talk) 07:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:54, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
File:Louvre - salle 314 - Présentation de la partie Présence et influences phéniciennes et puniques en Méditerranée (1100-100 av. J.-C.).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
Copyvio of Louvre Museum text. There is to much of content to be keep as a simple museum label. Miniwark (talk) 07:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per previous nomination :). —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:55, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Copyviol from: https://canaledieci.it/2023/02/24/fratelli-di-crozza-stasera-24-febbraio-2023-le-nuove-puntate-tra-le-imitazioni-matteo-messina-denaro-zelensky-e-bonaccini/ Holapaco77 (talk) 17:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- This is a baseless accusation.
You put a fake link that has nothing to do with it: I didn't take the image from that link you attached, I've never even visited it. That file comes from a recording I made myself. I point out another similar file that was loaded in this way: NoosRAI1.png. It's fine to argue, but you can't accuse like this without even having the evidence to support your theses.-SkorpioDecano (talk) 07:47, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- @SkorpioDekano: Screenshots from audiovisual works (such as films, television broadcasts, video clips) are the property of its producer or creator and they may not be uploaded to Commons unless the work itself is in the public domain or released under a free license or unless the copyright holder is willing to release the screenshot under a free license. Please, see: Commons:Screenshots.
- w:it:File:NoosRAI1.png is uploaded on it.wiki (not Commons) with an EDT licence.
- You can't remove the delete template on the file until this discussion is over, and an administrator will take a decision. --Holapaco77 (talk) 10:52, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Holapaco77: Can upload this file in the same way of w:it:File:NoosRAI1.png with an EDT license? SkorpioDecano (talk) 18:14, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: The file was a blatant copyright violation. The file cannot be upload on Italian Wikipedia as a Screenshot copyrighted since it was obviously cropped. Moreover, a screenshot of that show is already in the article. --Jaqen (talk) 14:35, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation? This pdf file is from https://www.izb.nl/missie-en-visie. There is no clue about the author, but I guess the organization IZB owns the copyright. This brochure is not yet in the public domain. I do not see a VRT ticket. And it may be advertising as well. JopkeB (talk) 10:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Materialscientist (talk) 09:26, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
Snapchat logo is a non-free logo. 80.62.116.107 19:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination; Snapchat logo deemed non-free at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Snapchat logo.svg, and this uses it in a greater-than-de minimis fashion. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 23:36, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
See Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_inappropriate_username similar username Taste1at (talk) 18:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- COM:INUSE. I don't think we should delete merely based on username. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Just revert the last edit in sk-Wikipedia, then its not in use anymore. As pointed out by Mdaniels5757, we cannot trust that user (they are obviously the same person!) since the user already misrepresented copyright. Taste1at (talk) 20:14, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete With such a username, we can't be sure of anything. Yann (talk) 09:01, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 20:55, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
Request deletion of the current version and revert to the previous version, as the new version exceeds COM:TOO. Wcam (talk) 20:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- How does it? It is a photo of the current card. –Fpmfpm (talk) 23:16, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Fpmfpm, please have a look at COM:TOO Japan. The birds don't seem like purely geometric shapes, and they're not text, so does that make this card a copyrighted design that can't be hosted on this site? Note that if so, there are some Wikipedias that would host it locally, possibly at a reduced size, but you'd have to check each Wikipedia language version's policy on fair use. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:13, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, I understand. I'm able to take a photo of the card myself and upload it here. Would that work? The photo will be my creation/product – so while it's a photo of a card that features a presumably-copyrighted design, it's still my photo to license as I wish, and could be used here, correct? Let me know if that would be a solution. –Fpmfpm (talk) 08:57, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Although you took the photo yourself, it is essentially a mechanical copy of a copyrighted work. Taking a photo of it does not nullify the copyright of the other work. Wcam (talk) 13:04, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, I understand. I'm able to take a photo of the card myself and upload it here. Would that work? The photo will be my creation/product – so while it's a photo of a card that features a presumably-copyrighted design, it's still my photo to license as I wish, and could be used here, correct? Let me know if that would be a solution. –Fpmfpm (talk) 08:57, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Exactly. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Fpmfpm, please have a look at COM:TOO Japan. The birds don't seem like purely geometric shapes, and they're not text, so does that make this card a copyrighted design that can't be hosted on this site? Note that if so, there are some Wikipedias that would host it locally, possibly at a reduced size, but you'd have to check each Wikipedia language version's policy on fair use. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:13, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yasu (talk) 15:32, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Dieses Foto ist zwar mein eigenes Werk, jedoch musste ich feststellen, dass es von der Bildqualität her kaum den modernen Ansprüchen von Wikipedia/Wikimedia genügt, was auch auf das Alter zurückzuführen ist. Außerdem kann die Relevanz dieses Fotos hinterfragt werden, zumal es nirgendwo verwendet wird. Hans-Rudi der Letzte (talk) 09:55, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 21:54, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Artist John Garçon is born in 1959 and is still alive, so this painting is still under copyright Culex (talk) 14:27, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Not enough proof of authorization (NB : file not anymore available on Flickr) TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 14:38, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: The uploader is not the author CoffeeEngineer (talk) 15:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Not own work [2] HeminKurdistan (talk) 16:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Uused table with no context. No educational value. Malcolma (talk) 16:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 21:56, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Photo of person who died in 1995, looks like scan from magazine or book, not work of uploader in 2023, no evidence original is free licensed. Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- If the images were taken by a family member they can be released under Cc-by-sa-4.0-heirs. --RAN (talk) 18:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Heirs of copyright holder would be more likely to have original photo; a photo taken from a published book, magazine, or newspaper would seem to make it less likely that they are heirs of the original creator and copyright holder. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 21:57, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
false date, dubious license, no true source information, no evidence of free license Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:17, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- If the images were taken by a family member they can be released under Cc-by-sa-4.0-heirs. --RAN (talk) 18:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 21:57, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Identical to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Schlafzimmer_3.jpg Markus13666 (talk) 16:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 21:57, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Low quality, wrong information George Ionut (talk) 16:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Usable, but probably over COM:TOO US. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- The logo was published under CC-BY 2.5 License accroding to developer.android.com. But the image is barely reusable and should be displaced by File:Android 14 Developer Preview logo.svg. Larryasou (talk) 05:45, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 21:58, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
logos commerciaux 2A01:CB08:8341:8300:DD4E:9EED:7115:9935 21:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 22:00, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
As this picture includes a fully readable text, it must be considered as a copyright infringement. Stigfinnare (talk) 21:41, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 22:00, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Not own work, source states copyright belong to Michael Kovac/Getty Images Günther Frager (talk) 21:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 22:00, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Likely not own work as the user uploaded several other images from Chrissy Metz that were plain copyvios (Getty metadata). Günther Frager (talk) 21:59, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 22:00, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Atmospheric generation but why do we need it? Ignatus (talk) 22:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope. --Polarlys (talk) 22:00, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
The head on the logo is above the threshold of originality Di (they-them) (talk) 22:55, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
-20230806225500-File:Logo_Indian_no_oficial.svg){kind=link}
- I agree. Delete per COM:TOO US. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:06, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Polarlys (talk) 22:00, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
copyvio, cf link in description RoBri (talk) 17:18, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- The photo used is the same on the pages of the other countries about 070 Shake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acostcruz (talk • contribs) 17:49, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Krd. --Rosenzweig τ 20:45, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
Found elsewhere on the web (e.g. [3]) and unlikely to be own work. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Bremps... 01:44, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:23, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
Feysbuch 186.173.197.106 02:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Buenas tardes, no entiendo la razón por la que indica que debe ser borrada la fotografía. Está realizada por mi, tal y cómo lo marco en la descripción. Si tiene algún problema con mis fotografías, hágamelo saber. NachoLPR (talk) 15:03, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete The Metadata shows "FB"=Facebook, showing that the photo was copied from Facebook. NachoLPR, if you really took the photo, contact COM:VRT. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:21, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Dubious own work. NachoLPR, for instructions on how to prove this is your own work, see COM:VRT. ClydeFranklin (talk) 03:53, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:24, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
Ninguna foto subida por este usuario es su propia obra, por qué esta foto lo sería? 186.173.197.106 02:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Buenas tardes, esta fotografía si es mía, realizada por mi vaya. Porque no lo sería? NachoLPR (talk) 12:12, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- Contact COM:VRT for this one, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:22, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Dubious own work. ClydeFranklin (talk) 16:34, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:24, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
This image contains text showing the source as "CUSD Data Warehouse", and the author of the image is given as "Chandler Unified School District". The web site for the Chandler Unified School District's data warehouse is "Copyright © 2022 Finalsite - all rights reserved." (See https://www.cusd80.com/Page/84246 for example.)I see no evidence that this image was released into the public domain under CC0 1.0 as claimed Meters (talk) 06:59, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 13:13, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Photograph of an American statue completed in 2006 per https://racstl.org/public-art/the-captains-return/, no FOP in the US for artwork. Abzeronow (talk) 16:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 08:58, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
And also
poor quality Микола Василечко (talk) 17:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 08:59, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
Not own work [4] HeminKurdistan (talk) 19:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 09:02, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
Photo contains piece of art that isn't mine. Not sure about this in hindsight in terms of copyright, hence suggesting deletion. LightPhoenix (talk) 19:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 09:02, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ninart Valencia (talk · contribs)
[edit]Appears to be out of COM:SCOPE, use of Commons for advertising a non-notable business.
— Rhododendrites talk | 20:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 09:02, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barbie dolls
[edit]See COM:VPC#Dimension of derivative works: photos of copyrighted toys are derivative works of the toys. This leaves only a few photos in the category which I believe are either de minimis or ineligible for copyright. Some of the photos are actually not toys but packaging with complex art.
- File:Barbie 1959 First Editions.jpg
- File:Barbie Fashion Model.JPG
- File:Barbie nudism.jpg
- File:BarbieAntes1997Despues.jpg
- File:Barbieswaistwidens.jpg
- File:Dior New Look.jpg
- File:Dye decolourisation at labscale and microscale SOPHIED.jpg
- File:Early Barbie doll en suite 01.jpg
- File:Early Barbie doll en suite 02.jpg
- File:Elch01m.jpg
- File:JjcobwebbBarbie.jpg
- File:Ken Carson.jpg
- File:Mattelno1br.jpg
File:Polaroid Barbie Pink Instant 600 Film Camera.jpg- File:Study of a murder on a Barbie figurine.jpg
- File:Sunning (2179966897).jpg
- File:Whitney Houston Barbie I Wanna Dance 1.jpg
- File:Whitney Houston Barbie I Wanna Dance 2.jpg
- File:Álbum+da+barbie.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Stefan4 (talk) 19:47, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- With reference to File:Early Barbie doll en suite 01.jpg and File:Early Barbie doll en suite 02.jpg (admittedly not among my better photos), and possibly some others here (I haven't looked through the batch) I would guess that the only elements here that were copyrighted and had their copyrights renewed are Barbie and Ken, who make up a pretty small portion of the pictures, albeit arguably constitute its main interest. But I'm not weighing in either way on the issue, you're welcome to delete these if people think it actually raises a copyright problem. - Jmabel ! talk 20:20, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
- So dollhouses aren't copyrighted? In that case, those two pictures are probably fine. --Stefan4 (talk) 16:37, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- But note COM:FOP#United States: "The term building means structures that are habitable by humans and intended to be both permanent and stationary, such as houses and office buildings, and other permanent and stationary structures designed for human occupancy, including but not limited to churches, museums, gazebos, and garden pavilions." I'm not sure if a dollhouse is permanent, stationary or designed for human occupancy. --Stefan4 (talk) 20:27, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Searching all the copyright renewals would be a pain, but RE0000280638 and RE0000280637 are renewals for 1958 Barbies, which seem to protect all later Barbies.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:41, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- Keep File:Polaroid Barbie Pink Instant 600 Film Camera.jpg -- where do you see a "toy" or "complex art" there? Trycatch (talk) 16:19, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- I think I must have ticked that checkbox by mistake. I don't see any problem with that photo. --Stefan4 (talk) 16:37, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- So you don't think the flower pattern sticker is copyrightable?--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Keep that one. De728631 (talk) 21:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Keep File:Dior New Look.jpg -- The appearance of the doll is totally unrelated to the purpouse of the photograph, which is to illustrate the New Look stetic trend created by Christian Dior in 1947. This is the only illustration of such work which appears in Wikipedia, thus this photograph existance is justified and required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.164.52.50 (talk • contribs) 2012-02-19T18:54:30 (UTC)
- This is not Wikipedia and it still looks like a copyvio. --Stefan4 (talk) 19:03, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
- I agree with Stefan, delete that file. De728631 (talk) 21:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Delete all but File:Polaroid Barbie Pink Instant 600 Film Camera.jpg. De728631 (talk) 21:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
- Keep all. --Guil2027 (talk) 00:19, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Why? --Stefan4 (talk) 00:30, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Why not? --Guil2027 (talk) 00:32, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- delete - there can be no question that dolls are protected by copyright under US law and that Barbie is covered by that. de minimis aside (eg a picture of a child's room or a shelf full or mixed toys) we can not keep any images of Barbie. --h-stt !? 11:07, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- Delete - indeed, these images constitute derivative works of copyrighted material. According to Commons:Derivative works, "action figures do not have utilitarian aspects and are therefore generally copyrighted as works of fine art." These images (barring the ones pointed out above) seem no exception. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 14:00, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
- keep - I dont understand why you would want to delete these.(File:Barbie Fashion Model.JPG). It is not copyright violation if you use the image of an item that is copyrighted in a creative commons sense, especially if that image was taken by an individual (such as the one I quoted, which I took). Memory Alpha does that all the time with respect ot screen caps from various Star Trek shows/movies - which are all copyrighted materials. With that regard, you might as well then delete all pics on wikiepdia because what they photograph is copyrighted in one way or another. Image File:Barbie Fashion Model.JPG was modified by me in terms of how the doll's hair is done and how she is dressed. The original dolls wasn't even dressed like this or looked like this. By that account, every person who uploads a picture of a fashion doll on flickr, let's say, would be prohibited from doing so. And everyone taking a picture of a barbie they want to sell on ebay is also also violating copyright? SOFA and PIPA havent become laws yet. This just doesnt make sense. --CarrieBee (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, those people are violating copyright, unless it qualifies as fair use. However, Commons doesn't allow fair use. --Stefan4 (talk) 21:02, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
- Keep all. The main problem I see here, and with these kind of multiple nominations, is that none of the pictures were taken by the same person in the same place. Multiple countries permit a total freedom of panorama—including 3D and 2D art, somes with the condition that should be taken in a public place (File:Sunning (2179966897).jpg), but public place is not necessarily a park or street; or even if the toy still copyrighted in the country of origin. If you want to delete them you have to investigate where they were taken, if the toy still copyrighted and then nominate them onr-by-one. Tbhotch™ 22:25, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- Other example of what cannot be considered a copyvio or fair use is File:Study of a murder on a Barbie figurine.jpg, where the toy is not visible at all. Tbhotch™ 22:26, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- The sculpted details are.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:23, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- With rare exception, countries with FOP only include permanently installed works. File:Sunning (2179966897).jpg was taken in Hawaii, and FOP doesn't apply at all for sculpture in the US.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:23, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- Unless tagged with {{FoP-Israel}} or anything similar, I think that we have to assume that photos of dolls are unfree per COM:PRP. --Stefan4 (talk) 23:37, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
- Delete. Unfortunately, I don't believe any of these images qualify for Commons (for reasons stated by others above). However, several of them would most definitely qualify as "fair-use" for use on Wikipedia. That being said, most of these aren't exactly "first-class" images and I believe most could easily be removed without much detriment to their respective articles (no offense to any of the photographers, but many appear rather "amateurish"). The remaining images that appear to be well-done could be reuploaded to their repsective Wikipedias with "fair-use" rationales (although I admit that will create a lot of "busy work" for the editors left to do the "clean-up"). I'm not a "professional" photographer, but I have access to a large assortment of Barbies (from various eras) and could easily take some nice professional looking photos to fill in some of the "gaps" that may result after the majority of less-than-steller images are removed. --- Crakkerjakk (talk) 11:44, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep all, for the reasons that Tbhotch mentioned above. Acdx (talk) 12:12, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It would appear that the copyright on Barbie dolls was renewed, making the vast majority of these non-free derivative works, which are strictly prohibited on Commons. There does seem to be consensus to keep File:Polaroid Barbie Pink Instant 600 Film Camera.jpg, so I've done that. FASTILY (TALK) 23:51, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barbie dolls
[edit]See COM:TOYS.
- File:Barbie Dolls.jpg
- File:Barbie Drawing.JPG
- File:Barbies.jpg
- File:Boneca Barbie.jpg
- File:Expozice sběratelských panenek Barbie v Galerii DollsLand.gif
- File:How to lose weight.JPG
- File:Ken.JPG
Stefan4 (talk) 21:15, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Deleted . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barbie dolls
[edit]Derivative works per COM:TOYS.
- File:'hole in a halter' top and wrap dress in leso.JPG
- File:'hole in a halter' top and wrap dress in Nigerian.JPG
- File:'kikoi' wrap skirt and halter top.JPG
- File:'kikoi' wrap skirt and side tied top.JPG
- File:1950s Inspired Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:2 piece maasai style wrap of tetron and lace.JPG
- File:3 piece maasai style wrap of tetron and lace.JPG
- File:AFRICAN - AMERICAN.JPG
- File:Alvin Ailey inspires Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Ankle lenghth apron, back skirt and halter top.JPG
- File:Ankle lenghth apron, side slitted back kirt and wrap top with leso edging.JPG
- File:Apron and slit skirt front view.JPG
- File:Apron concept with extended back tie sash.JPG
- File:Apron concept with leso edged bodice.JPG
- File:APRON CONCEPT.JPG
- File:APRON DRESS & BACK SKIRT.JPG
- File:APRON DRESS.JPG
- File:ARMLESS KANGA.JPG
- File:BACK TO NATURE.JPG
- File:Bantu hem skirt and halter top.JPG
- File:Barbie1.jpg
- File:Barby blond.jpg
- File:BASICALLY.JPG
- File:BLACK & WHITE.JPG
- File:BLUE KANGA CLOAK.JPG
- File:Bob Mackie Inspired Barbie Dolls at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Brides maids in leaf print kanga wraps.JPG
- File:Bustier apron and back skirt.JPG
- File:Bustier apron dress elaborated with hanky cut leso train.JPG
- File:Bustier apron dress hyphenated with ribbon.JPG
- File:Bustier apron dress with lace sash -back view.JPG
- File:Bustier apron dress with lace sash-front view.JPG
- File:Bustier apron in american denim.JPG
- File:Bustier apron style evening dress.JPG
- File:Bustier apron style wedding dress-back view.JPG
- File:Bustier apron style wedding dress.JPG
- File:Butier apron dress and hanky cut train-back view.JPG
- File:Byron Lars designed Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Byron Lars designed Cinnabar Sensation Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Cabaret Dancers Dolls at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:CHIC ETHNIC.jpg
- File:Christian Dior inspired Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:CLOAK & WRAP DRESS.JPG
- File:CORPORATE IN THE JUNGLE.JPG
- File:Costumes Inspired by France at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Couture Wedding Bob Mackie Inspired Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:CROP TOP WRAP.JPG
- File:Crop top, skirt and maasai style wrap with modesty waist cover.JPG
- File:Dance Til Dawn Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Disney inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Disney Mouseketeer inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Eiffel Tower inspired Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:EMPIRE KANGA.JPG
- File:EMPIRE.JPG
- File:Escada Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Faberge inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Faraway Forest Elf Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:FIT & FLARE APRON.JPG
- File:Formal Dress Barbie doll at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Foundation wrap dress and beaded sash.JPG
- File:Foundation wrap dress and cloak in Nigerian.JPG
- File:Fulla 2016 Present doll.jpg
- File:Goddess of the Galaxy Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:HALTER DRESS.JPG
- File:HALTER TOP & TROUSER.JPG
- File:HALTER TOPS & APRON LINE SKIRT.JPG
- File:Hanae Mori designed Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:INDIA - KENYA.JPG
- File:India Inspired, Princess of India, and Diwali Inspired Barbies at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Inuit Legend and Venetian Opulence dolls at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Joan Jett inspired Inspired Barbie Dolls at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:KANGA MIX & MATCH.JPG
- File:KANGA SLIT.JPG
- File:KANGA.JPG
- File:KITENGE BACK SKIRT.JPG
- File:Kitenge foundation dress of a wrap top and wrap skirt accessrized with a sheer cloak.JPG
- File:KITENGE THREE PIECE.JPG
- File:Lalka Barbie - Audrey Hepburn w roli księżniczki Anny z filmu Rzymskie wakacje Williama Wylera z 1953. Muzeum Sztuk Użytkowych w Poznaniu - styczeń 2018.jpg
- File:Laurence Xu Inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:LEAF & STARS.JPG
- File:LEAF DRESS.JPG
- File:Leso one shoulder foundation dress and matching solid cloak.JPG
- File:Leso one shoulder foundation dress and sash.JPG
- File:Leso one shoulder foundation dresses.JPG
- File:Leso print bustier and skirt-back view.JPG
- File:Leso print bustier apron and skirt-front view.JPG
- File:Leso print cloak and solid foundation dress.JPG
- File:Leso under arm wraps worn with matching skirt and strapless dress repectively.JPG
- File:Leso wrap skirt and backless halter top.JPG
- File:Leso wrap skirt with solid yoke and cropped leso wrap top.JPG
- File:Leso wrap skirt, solid and leso wrap top.JPG
- File:MAASAI CROP TOP.JPG
- File:MAASAI HOUND TOOTH.JPG
- File:Maasai style wrap in leso and solid tetron.JPG
- File:Maasai style wrap of solid black and black lace.JPG
- File:Maasai style wrap of tetron and textured fabric.JPG
- File:Mistress of the Manor Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:MODERNIZED APRON.JPG
- File:MONDAY & FRIDAY.JPG
- File:Morning Sun Princess and Evening Star Princess Barbies at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:MULTI SLIT.JPG
- File:NYAYO PHILOSOPHY.JPG
- File:One shoulder dress with front overlay that falls down back.JPG
- File:Pantone Inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Parisienne Pretty Barbie Doll at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Part kanga part tetron wrap top and tetron skirt.JPG
- File:PATY STYLE.JPG
- File:Peace and Love 70s and Benefit Ball Barbies at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:PEACOCK KANGA.JPG
- File:PINK KANGA.JPG
- File:Print kanga wrap top and solid wrap skirt with hem detail.JPG
- File:Promenade in the Park Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Provencale Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Puppe alone.jpg
- File:Queen of Hearts Bob Mackie Inspired Barbie Dolls at Expo Barbie Montreal Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Renaissance Faire Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Rest and relaxation. Priya, Honey,Andy,Tina and Isabelle at the beach.JPG
- File:Sanrio inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:SLIT APRON SKIRT & HALTER TOP.JPG
- File:SLIT APRON.JPG
- File:Spirit of the Sky and Spirit of the Water Barbies at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Star print leso wrap and halter.JPG
- File:Star print leso wrap and matching shoulder throw.JPG
- File:Star print leso wrap and shoulder throw-back view.JPG
- File:Suiting in the apron concept.JPG
- File:Sumatra Indonesia Inspired Barbies at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:Sydney Opera House Inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:TAUSI CLOAK.JPG
- File:Tetron and lace apon concept.JPG
- File:Tetron wrap dress and kanga shoulder wrap.JPG
- File:TEXTURE MIX & MATCH.JPG
- File:THE MODELS.JPG
- File:The Starry Night Inspired by Vincent Van Gogh at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:THE TWO MODELS.JPG
- File:Tie and dye 2 piece foundation wrap dress.JPG
- File:TROUSER AND WRAP LESSO MIX & MATCH.JPG
- File:Victorian Barbie at the Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:WATER FALL.JPG
- File:Wedgwood inspired Barbie at Barbie Expo Les Cours Mont-Royal.jpg
- File:WRAP & WRAP.JPG
- File:WRAP DRESS & TRAIN.JPG
- File:Wrap dress and embroidered sash.JPG
- File:Wrap dress of kanga print right over solid tetron left.JPG
- File:Wrap top and trousers that has train attached along apron lines.JPG
- File:Wrap with train extension.JPG
— Racconish 💬 09:19, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. AshFriday (talk) 23:48, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 07:01, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barbie dolls
[edit]Per COM:TOYS
- File:Beauty, queen of the jungle.JPG
- File:Bustier apron dress without sash.JPG
- File:COLOUR MIX.JPG
- File:Tie and dye foundation dress and matching cloak.JPG
- File:Toys 2007-118-079 (15407001390).jpg
- File:Toys 2013-056-023b (15590189541).jpg
- File:Toys 2013-056-035d (14972104864).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
— Racconish 💬 09:48, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:20, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barbie dolls
[edit]Copyrighted 3 dimensional figure, violation of COM:TOYS.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
(Oinkers42) (talk) 15:32, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
- Keep, the image is not a violation and is used as the lead image of a major article. Go rain on some other parade. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:52, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Randy Kryn, on what basis do these pass COM:TOYS? Why do you think it's at all relevant that it's currently in use? Cakelot1 (talk) 20:04, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Obviously fails COM:TOYS. As with all the previous DRs above, these are Derivative works of a copyrighted work. Cakelot1 (talk) 20:06, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:53, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Barbie dolls
[edit]Per COM:TOYS, Barbies are copyrighted by default. Excluding an advertisement that would need its own copyright notice and a few de minimis cases.
A few have tags indicating there was not copyright notice, but every box I've found from the relevant time period includes a copyright notice (for example [5] [6] [7]). It's hard to dig up the box for exact models, but the burden for that is likely on those claiming there was no copyright notice rather than the other way around.
Nominating photos from an exhibit in Italy, which does not have COM:FOP. Excluding museum exhibits in places with FOP (like those in Category:Barbie Expo), but I suspect those should be nominated, too, as temporary exhibitions rather than "permanent displays". Leaving those for someone else, though.
See also: the many other nominations on this page for the same reasons.
- File:Barbie and me.jpg
- File:Barbie e skipper con vari outfit anni '60 (coll. baldi bellavia) 01.jpg
- File:Barbie e skipper con vari outfit anni '60 (coll. baldi bellavia) 02.jpg
- File:BARBIE ON A BLACK CROSS.jpg
- File:Barbie's Operation (3284254974).jpg
- File:Black Barbie from 1980 in the box.jpg
- File:Catwoman Barbie.jpg
- File:Vintage Malibu Barbie (cropped).jpg
- File:Vintage Malibu Barbie 2 (cropped) green background.jpg
- File:Vintage Malibu Barbie 2 (cropped).jpg
- File:Vintage Malibu Barbie 2.jpg
- File:Vintage Malibu Barbie.jpg
_01.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_02.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_green_background.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
— Rhododendrites talk | 20:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Per the nominator and past DRs where the same or similar images were deleted. Not to mention at least a few of these are questionably in scope to begin with anyway. --Adamant1 (talk) 20:55, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep File:Catwoman Barbie.jpg We have been through this before with sculptures of artworks. The image is okay in Australia due to it being a free country (ie one with FoP). It is CC in the US because I took the image and licensed it as such. WMF legal has fought and won cases on this basis before. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:06, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- FOP is typically just for things situated permanently in a particular location (
The exception generally applies only to works on permanent public display.
). The idea is to exempt things like buildings and major public art. I'd be surprised if Australia were different in that regard, but I'd be happy to be wrong. — Rhododendrites talk | 01:49, 7 August 2023 (UTC) - I've never heard about any WMF legal battles over FoP. If you cite the case, then we can be edified by the details, the arguments, and the resolution.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:32, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- FOP is typically just for things situated permanently in a particular location (
- Delete both for the obvious reasons and because it would indirectly kill the ridiculous debate currently going on at w:talk:Barbenheimer Dronebogus (talk) 14:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- In my experience, exporting disputes from enwp to Commons is unhelpful, and might even push annoyed Commons admins to lend more credibility to the other side. If you opt to remove that part of your comment, you're welcome to remove this response, too. — Rhododendrites talk | 15:49, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep the image being used on Barbenheimer for page relevance and out-of-copyright information on the image page. Please do not remove the comment above (you can strike words out) as an example of bias pertaining to the RfC. Randy Kryn (talk) 05:36, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Randy Kryn, as you did in the last vote, you've used the argument that the image shouldn't be deleted because it's in use. But that's completely besides the point since we don't keep copyright violating works just because they are used. The argument is that the
"out-of-copyright information"
is incorrect, and you have not engaged with those arguments made in the nom. Cakelot1 (talk) 07:13, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Randy Kryn, as you did in the last vote, you've used the argument that the image shouldn't be deleted because it's in use. But that's completely besides the point since we don't keep copyright violating works just because they are used. The argument is that the
- Delete per the well argued nom. It is possible that some of these are public domain but without evidence (and per COM:PRP) we can't keep them based on a possibility Cakelot1 (talk) 07:16, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- At least think out of the box and leave the image that's on the Barbenheimer page alone. You don't think if Mattel wanted it taken down they would have contacted someone? The page has had 1.4 million plus views since a photo of Barbie has been up-front, and of those views I would think that the Mattel company, its attorneys, its law clerks, its board of directors, and its secretaries would have clicked on the page and know that one of their dolls is being featured. They all know it, yet nobody got on the horn or filed a complaint. Mattel is perfectly happy having it up there! That's obvious, and because the copyright is still being questioned, and literally nobody cares to legally contest its use, at least leave it until this unique film-combination period moves along a bit and the page goes back to normal viewing. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:27, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- "Nobody has complained yet" isn't a reason for keeping anything. Images on Commons must be usable and modifiable by anyone for any purpose. Our policies are in place to protect not just Wikipedia, but everyone who uses the content. If someone would be opening themselves up to litigation by taking our Barbie photos, putting them in a book or on a poster, and selling them, we cannot host it. People need to know when they go to Commons that the license is reliable. "But it's used in an article" is irrelevant. If you would like it to be used in an article and not hosted on Commons, that's what en:WP:NFCC is for (for local uploads to Wikipedia). There's probably a good case for NFCC when it comes to the main Barbie article. — Rhododendrites talk | 22:51, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- That makes sense. Would you or someone please add the Vintage Barbie 2 cropped to the Wikipedia files (The one being used on Barhenheimer now)? I'm not computer savvy enough to add it and yes, the Barbie page could argue for it for sure and the Barbenheimer page could have a good case. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:06, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- I don't there's much chance you'd get an WP:NFCC Rationale for the Barhenheimer page. As to the main Barbie page Wikipedia would probably want a clearer and up to date image than "Vintage Barbie". Best to leave it until/if this deletion happens. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 07:07, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- ^^ If you're going the en:WP:NFCC route, you can pick an ideal photo (like one from an official Mattel website, even), then just upload it locally to wikipedia and follow the prompts to explain why it qualifies for NFCC. Actually, it looks like the main Barbie article already has a couple non-free images: en:File:MattelBarbieno1br.jpg and en:File:Oreo Fun Barbie.jpg. If you wanted to upload another one, you could use the templates on those pages as a template. — Rhododendrites talk | 13:31, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- Can't do uploads on my computer, which is why I asked. The image used on Barbenheimer fits that page well and serves as a counterpoint to an image of Oppenheimer within a double-image. The reasoning for its use at Barbenheimer would be as representative of the portrayed character per the use of the Oppenheimer image. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:43, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Randy Kryn, it "fitting" or looking good isn't enough to get for WP:NFCC unfortunately. Even in the main barbie article I can't think of any non-free justification (the section doesn't say anything about the barbie in question).
representative of the portrayed character
, simply isn't a strong enough reason. And non of this is a reason for keeping it on commons, which is what we are discussing here. (I have the original flikr upload bookmarked so if there is suddenly an extremely good WP:NFC based reason I can always upload it to wp, although this sort of discussion should really be happening at w:Talk:Barbenheimer) Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 22:18, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Randy Kryn, it "fitting" or looking good isn't enough to get for WP:NFCC unfortunately. Even in the main barbie article I can't think of any non-free justification (the section doesn't say anything about the barbie in question).
- Can't do uploads on my computer, which is why I asked. The image used on Barbenheimer fits that page well and serves as a counterpoint to an image of Oppenheimer within a double-image. The reasoning for its use at Barbenheimer would be as representative of the portrayed character per the use of the Oppenheimer image. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:43, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- ^^ If you're going the en:WP:NFCC route, you can pick an ideal photo (like one from an official Mattel website, even), then just upload it locally to wikipedia and follow the prompts to explain why it qualifies for NFCC. Actually, it looks like the main Barbie article already has a couple non-free images: en:File:MattelBarbieno1br.jpg and en:File:Oreo Fun Barbie.jpg. If you wanted to upload another one, you could use the templates on those pages as a template. — Rhododendrites talk | 13:31, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- I don't there's much chance you'd get an WP:NFCC Rationale for the Barhenheimer page. As to the main Barbie page Wikipedia would probably want a clearer and up to date image than "Vintage Barbie". Best to leave it until/if this deletion happens. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 07:07, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- That makes sense. Would you or someone please add the Vintage Barbie 2 cropped to the Wikipedia files (The one being used on Barhenheimer now)? I'm not computer savvy enough to add it and yes, the Barbie page could argue for it for sure and the Barbenheimer page could have a good case. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:06, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment FYI, this and this. Nyxaros (talk) 20:10, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
- As the nom noted there doesn't seem to be any evidence of Pd-no-notice, and non was provided in those DRs. The user asserting no-notice doesn't seem to be the photographer so it doesn't seem wise to take that without evidence. Mdaniels5757 (and the closer IronGargoyle), if there's some obvious evidence of there not being a copyright notice on this particular barbie (when others at the time had them), it would be much appreciated if you could point it out. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 09:33, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom, we'd need evidence of no copyright notice on the original boxes to justify keeping the images. Di (they-them) (talk) 23:55, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Barbie on a black cross as transformative and de minimis. The rest are probably unjustifiable, unfortunately. David Eppstein (talk) 20:39, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry, but whether it's transformative is a consideration of fair use, which Commons doesn't accept, and the doll is the focal point (and title) of the image. — Rhododendrites talk | 02:50, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment - I already nominated one of the files for deletion here Commons:Deletion requests/File:Black Barbie from 1980 in the box.jpg. Should I request that DR to be closed for this one? (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:14, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 06:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
COM:CSD#7 eien20 (talk) 16:01, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- COM:CSD#G7. low quality. replaceable File:2019 Osaka Gubernatorial election.svg. --̴̴̴̴
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:50, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
This is not an own work. Some people upload other people's works here and then make crops to fool the community. 200.111.222.227 17:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Hopefully IPs see... 200.111.222.227 17:52, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Can you link the source image? I can get behind deletion on a precautionary basis, but proof of copyright violation would be a lot better, since a crop of this image, which of course you also nominated for deletion, is COM:INUSE. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:02, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: No evidence provided. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:51, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Deleted pag 2001:8003:2468:3100:88FA:C60C:975:FA6F 04:58, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, in use. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:34, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
I proposed deletion of the source file. Find a private detective to see the relation between copyvio uploaders and some crop makers. 200.111.222.227 17:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- No-one is hiring a private detective. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:01, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:51, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
violation du droit d'auteur DocMuséo 09:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jon Kolbert (talk) 00:11, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Violation du droit d'auteur : https://www.ville.valleyfield.qc.ca/parc-delpha-sauve comme tous les imports de Bob20012001 DocMuséo 09:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Violation du droit d'auteur : https://www.bonjourquebec.com/fr-fr/repertoire/evenements/regates-de-valleyfield/0om7 comme tous les imports de Bob20012001 DocMuséo 09:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
violation du droit d'auteur : https://www.facebook.com/regatesvalleyfield/posts/2411776372295461/?paipv=0&eav=AfZ0ZGcAmY6gWSAGwreiMrzMlVdkNJKD2wUZwwNCxuarJg9He0Vr1LKoJWaPv5cQRUE&_rdr DocMuséo 09:40, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Violation du droit d'auteur DocMuséo 09:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 22:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Claimed to be own work but given the uploader's other copyright violations, this is a dubious claim. Likely a screen capture from a broadcast. See https://www.facebook.com/maamamaryama12/videos/duqa-magaalada-berbera-cabdishakuur-ciddin-oo-markale-shaaciyay-inuu-yahay-musha/677759666277988/ Whpq (talk) 01:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:35, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Unlikely to be the Flickr uploader's own work. Their profile is full of stolen art Kelly The Angel (talk) 10:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. This may be AI-generated, but in absence of information. --Yann (talk) 16:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Unlikely to be the Flickr uploader's own work. Their profile is full of stolen art Kelly The Angel (talk) 10:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. This may be AI-generated, but in absence of information. --Yann (talk) 16:44, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Please delete, because foto hase nothing to do with Souther Cross Hotel. Ulanwp (talk) 10:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Object. First, that is more of a cause for renaming than a deletion. Second, the Southern Cross Hotel is the tall building at the left of the photograph, as can clearly be seen in this view from Google Maps. Grutness (talk) 15:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Moved, and redirect deleted. --Yann (talk) 16:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope, made-up flag (there is no anti-zoophile organization this represents so it can’t be “official”) Dronebogus (talk) 10:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Fanmade flags are out of scope. Bremps... 01:47, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
No evidence of notability Dronebogus (talk) 10:53, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Derivative work without a source. ✗plicit 12:03, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Alright, Mr @Explicit, the source was added, hopefully that solves the issue. Sorry for that, I hadn't had the source when it was originally uploaded via Wikipedia. Coldstreamer20 (talk) 16:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: OK now. --Yann (talk) 16:47, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Insufficient or doubtful author or license;OTRS validation required (F1): grabbed from Facebook Микола Василечко (talk) 12:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:47, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Insufficient or doubtful author or license;OTRS validation required (F1): grabbed from Facebook Микола Василечко (talk) 12:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:47, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Milad shah hosseini (talk · contribs)
[edit]Several uploads by this user, apparently all showing himself, were already deleted as out of scope, because of COM:HOST etc. I suppose this has not changed, and these uploads should be deleted as well.
- File:Milad shah hosseini the 40th Fajr Film Festival day.jpg
- File:Miladshahhosseiniwiki.jpg
- File:Miladshahhosseini.jpg
Rosenzweig τ 13:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:50, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
own work claim questionable. Watermark for "آویدنیوز" is visible (https://avidnews.ir/). HeminKurdistan (talk) 13:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Update: File found here: https://avidnews.ir/4743. HeminKurdistan (talk) 13:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 16:50, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
COM:DW, uploader does not appear to be the original copyright holder Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep The coat of arms is out of copyright and the text is not eligible for a copyright. --RAN (talk) 18:38, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: as per RAN. PD in the source country anyway. --Yann (talk) 16:52, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
COM:DW, license of original uncertain Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:25, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep The text and signatures are not eligible for a copyright. --RAN (talk) 18:39, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: as per RAN. --Yann (talk) 16:56, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Not 'Wiki Loves Monuments' CzarJobKhaya (talk) 16:55, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 16:57, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
same file as File:Mgr.Antoine de Vial.jpg and author is Arnaud de Vial Jmax (talk) 17:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:41, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
copyright violation Xocolatl (talk) 17:44, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:42, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
Seems an official photo from a political or news website and has no Meta data to prove ownerships of uploader. Pierre cb (talk) 11:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:38, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
This image is of the wrong Elias Polk. Photo source:(https://terryvilleccassn.org/images-2/) Nor is it from the 1850s. Benjamin.P.L (talk) 12:25, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep and label properly. The confusion will occur again, Commons is a good place to make corrections for future users of the image. See: Elias Polk . --RAN (talk) 15:41, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:38, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
عكس تكراري است Naazaninefarmehr (talk) 10:01, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment In use at fa:آراز_دانش. --Rosenzweig τ 13:14, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, file no longer in use and article deleted. --IronGargoyle (talk) 07:16, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ca as Copyvio (copyvio). This is a COM:FOP case. Where was the photo taken? —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:28, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- If the draft in which this image is placed is accurate, this artwork was intended for display in an American museum. Since America's FoP only liberates photos of buildings, I believe this file infringes copyright. Ca (talk) 12:59, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 22:22, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by EgorovaSvetlana as Fair use (Non-free) and the most recent rationale was: 2D art|image has rationale=. Delete (but ineligible for speedy as FoP is involved). —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 03:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Mdaniels5757 Hello, thank you for FoP notion, as ICA does allow "Noncommercial photography and video recording is permitted for most works on view; exceptions will be indicated with a no photography icon." For this particular work I can not recall if it had such indication, though on ICA site there is no any picture exists for this Chiho Aoshima's past exhibition and also The Sandra and Gerald Fineberg Art Wall displays murals commissioned annually only temporary, so that is also already more as historical photo. EgorovaSvetlana (talk) 14:56, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; ICA's restriction is not relevant here, and we are only concerned with the artist's copyright. —holly {chat} 22:25, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Arthur Szyk 1894-1951. Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Time cover 22 December 1941 illustration December 1941 WW2 propaganda drawing Library of congress No known copyright.jpg
[edit]
This file was initially tagged by Asclepias as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Apparently bogus CC license. As specified at the source, this work is not free : [8].
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion about whether this work of a 1951-deceased artist isn't already in the PD. -- Túrelio (talk) 09:20, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Published in 1941 in the United States. In the United States, for published works of that era, copyright is based on the year of publication, not on the author's death. This work was published on 22 December 1941 in Time magazine. This issue of Time magazine has a copyright notice, had its copyright renewed and is not one of the issues in the public domain: TIME/PD issues. Its copyright would expire 95 years after publication, at the end of 2036. The source, the Library of Congress states explicitly that this image is in copyright and that its copyright is held by Time-Life [9]. The claim "No known copyright" in the Commons filename is not at the source and seems an invention of the uploader, as is the fake and contradictory CC license. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- I believe Time's renewal would cover the text and any art by staff artists. I don't think it would cover third party art, the artist would have to file for renewal. --RAN (talk) 15:20, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- The Library of Congress is usually accurate in its assessments of copyrights (except in some cases such as the Bain collection, where it's up to the reader to research the actual origin of each work). For this work by Szyk for Time, it's not a vague statement. The assessment by the LoC is very precise by stating that the copyright of this individual work is owned by Time-Life, meaning that LoC checked it specifically. As a work commissioned by Time, the copyright renewal is by Time. It is the same situation for other works of Szyk commissioned by various publishers. The renewal would usually be made by the publisher, although perhaps it could also be made by someone else. For example, for works of Szyk published in books, cf. Copyright Renewals, where most renewals are by the respective publishers and one by Szyk's daughter. -- Asclepias (talk) 14:46, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as the LOC specifically calls out this image as being owned by Time Inc. —holly {chat} 22:36, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Inferior duplicate of File:Mto crest.png ProfAuthor (talk) 12:05, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —holly {chat} 22:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: The uploader is not the author CoffeeEngineer (talk) 00:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- I am the author of this pic.
- Can't understand why you say this! Adrianedmonson (talk) 10:48, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and COM:PCP. Adrianedmonson, please see COM:VRT for instructions how to prove this is your work. ClydeFranklin (talk) 03:42, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
- @CoffeeEngineer: What makes you say that the uploader is not the author? —holly {chat} 01:04, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Holly Cheng: , The uploader might not be the author, as her name is not written in the author field and that she uploaded another file from another author [10]. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 12:31, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- But, be not mistaken, I like the picture, so, if @Adrianedmonson: could come back to us, I would be glad. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 12:33, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Holly Cheng: , The uploader might not be the author, as her name is not written in the author field and that she uploaded another file from another author [10]. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 12:31, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
![[10]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SR-CHACO.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination, PCP. --Gbawden (talk) 06:56, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
In Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dr. Amelia Levinson Gates.jpg, it is alleged that the photo was not published contemporaneously. The crop was deleted and restored per COM:UNDEL. I have no opinion on the matter, but both files must receive the same treatment. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:06, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- This image can be found here: https://ancestors.familysearch.org/en/LDQT-B6S/amelia-levinson-1866-1947. The people in the picture and their birth/death dates are: Egbert James Gates 1869-1923, Adeline Melissa Rhodes 1832-1921, Howard Baker Gates 1867-1914, Amelia Levinson 1866-1947. Since Howard Baker Gates died in 1914, we can assume the picture was taken on or before 1914, which would make the image copyright free. Greg Henderson (talk) 15:12, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Publication is what would matter here. We do have US case law as paraphrased by User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) that says that publication occurs when a photograph leaves the custody of the original photographer, and it is possible that this photograph was revealed to the public before 1928. Abzeronow (talk) 16:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep True, images from photo studios are made public when they are transferred to the sitter. The sitter is a member of the public. As a counter example: We have whole sets of images where they are assumed to have never been seen by the public, until proven published, like the Bain Collection. The LOC received the negatives directly from the photographer, so we have a provenance for them. Most of the images were never found in circulation. Also to be eligible for a US copyright you had to display a copyright symbol up until 1989, and register for a copyright. Copyright prior to 1964 had to be renewed, or they expired. You can see examples of a copyright symbol on negatives here: Category:Bain copyright notice. --RAN (talk) 18:05, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Ticket:2023081110008271 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 17:01, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Permission appears to have been received. --Gbawden (talk) 06:58, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
These are pictures of the uploader's deceased father. They are incorrectly licenced to appear here. They are advised to regularise the licencing by use of COM:VRT. In the interim they are nominated for deletion.
🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 08:45, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Well, if these where pictures taken by his deceased father, any of the category:License tags for transferred copyright could be used, but these are images of his deceased father, so without knowing who took them, we'll probably have to wait until 120 years have passed. PaterMcFly (talk) 16:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment they are unlikely to be taken by the subject. It is quite possible that they are taken by a family member, and one of the tags mentioned by PaterMcFly could apply. 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 18:29, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- File:Ukkg 1.jpg is declared at w:en:Draft talk:Moe Nyo U Ko Ko Gyi to be the subject's passport photograph in possession of the uploader. 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 07:50, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Do we have special rules for these? Passport photograps by a machine would probably not be convered by copyright (and certainly not by the owner of said machine) PaterMcFly (talk) 18:23, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- PaterMcFly No-one has suggested it is from a machine. These often used to be taken by the local professional photographer in my youth in England. We have no idea what was done in Burma.COM:PCP applies. 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 20:50, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Do we have special rules for these? Passport photograps by a machine would probably not be convered by copyright (and certainly not by the owner of said machine) PaterMcFly (talk) 18:23, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, PCP. --Gbawden (talk) 06:59, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
عكس اشتباه بارگذاري شده Naazaninefarmehr (talk) 09:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment In use at fa:آراز_دانش. --Rosenzweig τ 13:16, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Scope? & PCP. --Gbawden (talk) 06:59, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation MJXVI (talk) 17:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Going to need evidence of copyvio. Uploader was an active contributor back in 2013, AGF. --Gbawden (talk) 07:02, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Source: "Artwork and Writings © Travis Simpkins 1999-2023. All Rights Reserved." HeminKurdistan (talk) 19:43, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, can be undeleted with permission from the artist. --Gbawden (talk) 07:00, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Paintings from VIctoria Trunova who recently passed away. All her works are naturally still protected by Copyright.
- File:V. Trunova "Momus".jpg
- File:V. Trunova "Nail".jpg
- File:V. Trunova "Pilgrimage".jpg
- File:V. Trunova "Radio is the best".jpg
- File:V. Trunova "The Falling Petals".jpg
Günther Frager (talk) 21:03, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- I am her son and literally have full rights for her artworks Bryarey (talk) 23:15, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- In that case you need to send the authorization to COM:VRTS. Notice that Commons requires a license that allows redistribution, derivatives and commercial usage, so please read carefully COM:Licensing. Günther Frager (talk) 23:25, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, can be undeleted with permission. --Gbawden (talk) 07:05, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Incorrect Presidential Seal of Colombia AlexExpensive (talk) 02:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Oppose ¿Y cual es el correcto? ¿dónde están las fuentes de que es incorrecto? ¿aquí también va a forzar una mentira como lo hizo en la wikipedia en inglés con el artículo en:Flag of the president of Colombia? --Milenioscuro (talk) 10:20, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy keep COM:INUSE. Argue about accuracy elsewhere, such as on the file's talk page. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:20, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept (non-admin closure) ClydeFranklin (talk) 03:58, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation? I have doubts that the uploader really is the maker of his photo. It is also on https://www.toerismepoortklokenpeel.nl/ ("Copyright © 2023 Toerismepoort Klok & Peel. Alle rechten voorbehouden" = all rights reserved.) and on Tripadvisor, where it looks like a staffmember of the museum has put the photo there. JopkeB (talk) 08:10, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Same for:
- File:Museum met groen dak.jpg, which may be a cutout because it looks the same, with the same details, only closer
--JopkeB (talk) 08:58, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete 20 upper 20:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
See discussion on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Klokken van de Wereld - India.jpg. --JopkeB (talk) 02:37, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- Beste Ida 2A02:A440:D805:1:3CFA:4792:FF6B:48E8, ik zie dat voor de files die op de andere deletion request stonden de permissies zijn geaccepteerd, maar voor deze twee zijn nog niet eens permissies ontvangen. Klopt dat? JopkeB (talk) 18:34, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: we need VRT confirmation on this file, once that's done it will be undeleted. --Abzeronow (talk) 16:44, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Dieses Foto ist zwar mein eigenes Werk, jedoch musste ich feststellen, dass es von der Bildqualität her kaum den modernen Ansprüchen von Wikipedia/Wikimedia genügt, was auch darauf zurückzuführen ist, dass es abfotografiert ist. Hans-Rudi der Letzte (talk) 09:57, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Während das obere tatsächlich relativ unscharf ist, ist dieses hier scharf und detailreich. Wovon ist es denn abfotografiert? PaterMcFly (talk) 16:57, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Freigabe des Fotografen Werner Sonntag fehlt (s. Dateiseite). XenonX3 (talk) 19:57, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: we need permission from Werner Sonntag, the photographer. --Abzeronow (talk) 16:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by A.Savin as no permission (No permission since) Krd 13:40, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Hat selbst nach Commons-Maßstäben keine SH. Das sind einfachste geometrische Formen (Rauten, Kreise und Sterne) sowie ein paar Buchstaben. Der LA ist unnötig. Keep -- Chaddy (talk) 14:11, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep so ist es, keine Freigabe erforderlich. --Ralf Roletschek 14:27, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Text + simple geometric, not copyrightable, IMO. Ankry (talk) 17:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Hello Ankry, how are the stars simple geometric when in fact they look both "3D-ish" and "shining"? IMO for such a design more creativity is needed rather than for a simple geometric shape. --A.Savin 19:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Each consists of 10 triangles of 2 colouring variants. Ankry (talk) 22:06, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- A triangle is a simple geometric shape with {{PD-ineligible}}, that's for sure, but is an image sampled from "10 triangles of 2 colouring variants" really still PD-ineligible? --A.Savin 06:27, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- In my opinion it is still PD-ineligible. Especially, if the set of triangles constitutes a regular form. But I wonder why my opinion here is considered so important that the whole DR needs to wait for it. Ankry (talk) 23:42, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
- A triangle is a simple geometric shape with {{PD-ineligible}}, that's for sure, but is an image sampled from "10 triangles of 2 colouring variants" really still PD-ineligible? --A.Savin 06:27, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- As @A.Savin already knows, the stars are public domain and have been modified. (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:General_of_Armies_insignia.svg) Bildersindtoll (talk) 07:21, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Each consists of 10 triangles of 2 colouring variants. Ankry (talk) 22:06, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Hello Ankry, how are the stars simple geometric when in fact they look both "3D-ish" and "shining"? IMO for such a design more creativity is needed rather than for a simple geometric shape. --A.Savin 19:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per above. --A.Savin 19:00, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Per what? What are you referring to? -- Chaddy (talk) 16:25, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I read through COM:TOO Germany, and I'm still unsure on this one and will look with interest on the decision by the closing admin. I will say that I find the pattern of blue and white rhombi more artistic than the pattern of stars, which it might be possible to argue is a utilitarian way to represent stars (I don't know how that would work under Germany jurisprudence). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:14, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- The en:Lozenge (heraldry) in white and blue are the ancient coat of arms of Bavaria, they are out of any copyright for a few centuries. --h-stt !? 16:11, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Text + simple geometric + the Blue and White "rhombus pattern" is equivalent to these from the bavarian state flage and coat of arms. There are also public domain. --Bildersindtoll (talk) 21:50, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I see. So the pattern of stars is really the only question. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:13, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- I took the stars from a public domain graphic and modified them. (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:General_of_Armies_insignia.svg) Bildersindtoll (talk) 07:19, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- If you designed the logo, that resolves any issue, but in that case, shouldn't you state that you are the author on the file page? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:23, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- In any case, this seems to be the source, which should be described on File:FC Bayern 5 Stars.png as well. Had Bildersindtoll done it from the beginning, there would have been no tagging from my part and no RfD. Sometimes it's really quite simple. --A.Savin 07:32, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Since I basically just put the content together, I assumed that I couldn't be the author either. Bildersindtoll (talk) 07:55, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Correct assumption. --A.Savin 08:04, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- So is this really a logo that's being used by the team? That said, if all the conceivably copyrightable elements are in the public domain, what could be the basis for supporting deletion of a file that's COM:INUSE? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:39, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Insufficient source & copyright information on file description page, I guess. --A.Savin 09:08, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Anything that's missing should be added, and then that would seem to solve that problem. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- I agree. However, I'm no pro on licensing, so if someone could help that would be great. Bildersindtoll (talk) 16:38, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- So what do you all mean? Does anything else need to be changed or is "PD text logo" sufficient? Bildersindtoll (talk) 13:30, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- PD text logo is sufficient. There is nothing copyrightable depicted in this logo. -- Chaddy (talk) 14:46, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, can the comment on deletion / deletion discussion then be removed? Bildersindtoll (talk) 10:38, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- PD text logo is sufficient. There is nothing copyrightable depicted in this logo. -- Chaddy (talk) 14:46, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- So what do you all mean? Does anything else need to be changed or is "PD text logo" sufficient? Bildersindtoll (talk) 13:30, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- I agree. However, I'm no pro on licensing, so if someone could help that would be great. Bildersindtoll (talk) 16:38, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Anything that's missing should be added, and then that would seem to solve that problem. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- keep - Threshold of Originality is not met, the round emblem of the club combines the never copyrighted coat of arms of Bavaria with simple geometric elements, the stars are too simple on their own, the combination of previously known elements does not constitute a work under German and US copyright law. --h-stt !? 16:13, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
@Krd: Magst du deinen LA bitte zurückziehen? Das ist eine völlig unnötige ABM in diesem mehr als eindeutigen Fall. -- Chaddy (talk) 16:20, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
@A.Savin: Dasselbe gilt übrigens für die Markierung mit "no permission". Sowas ist halt absolut unnötig. Und gerade erst Recht, da Commons doch eh schon kaum die ganzen LAs abgearbeitet bekommt. -- Chaddy (talk) 16:24, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- Kein eindeutiger Fall fürs Schnellbehalten bzw. Rücknahme, übrigens hat Ankry auf meine Frage bis heute nicht geantwortet, obwohl ein Löschantrag keine Abstimmung ist. --A.Savin 19:05, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- ? Viel eindeutiger als das hier geht gar nicht. Daran ändern auch die Sterne nichts, die ebenfalls nur simpelste Geometrie und vorbekannte Elemente sind.
- Und ja, eine LD ist keine Abstimmung, das ist richtig. Hier zählen Argumente. Und die stehen klar für Behalten und es gibt nichts, was eine Löschung rechtfertigen würde.
- Solche LAs wie dieser hier tragen zum schlechten Ansehen der Löschpraxis auf Commons bei. -- Chaddy (talk) 19:41, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
- Aus meiner Sicht sollte die Löschung doch erledigt sein, oder? Die Rauten entsprechen dem bayrischen Landeswappen bzw. sind einfache geometrischen Formen. Daher ist das "klassische" FCB-Logo ja auch vorhanden. Die Sterne sind wie bereits erläutert gemeinfrei. --Bildersindtoll (talk) 10:49, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion, Bavarian coat of arms plus PD stars. --Abzeronow (talk) 16:51, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
The file was initially tagged by Komarof as Dw no source since (dw no source since).
The photo was taken in 1934 in London, UK, by the London Panoramic Company (abbreviated as London Panoramic Coy.). Do we know anything about the actual photographer(s) of this company? Years of death? Can we (at some point) use {{PD-UK-unknown}} for the file, was the required research to use it done? Or should the file only be undeleted in 2055 with {{PD-old-assumed}}?
A 1934 UK photograph was still protected on the URAA date for the UK, so this file is still protected in the US until the end of 2029, and it should be deleted in any case. The question is if undeletion can happen in 2030 ({{PD-UK-unknown}} and {{PD-US-expired}}) or 2055 ({{PD-old-assumed-expired}}). Rosenzweig τ 16:48, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with "Ornithological Congress Oxford".
Also affected by this deletion request:
- File:Ewald,Paul Peter 1934 London.jpg
- File:Minkowski,Rudolph 1934 London.jpg
- File:Rasetti,Franco 1934 London.jpg
- File:Keesom,Willem Hendrik 1934 London.jpg
- File:Frisch,Otto 1934 London.jpg
- File:Elsasser,Walther 1934 London.jpg
- File:Hylleraas,Egil 1934 London.jpg
- File:Hund,Friedrich 1934 London.jpg
- File:Bragg,Lawrence 1934 London.jpg
- File:The Royal Society 1934 London-2.jpg
- File:Scherrer,Paul 1934 London.jpg
- File:Szilard,Leo 1934 London.jpg
- File:The Royal Society 1934 London-1.jpg
- File:George Placzek 1934 London.jpg
- File:Fermi,Enrico 1934 London.jpg
- File:London,Fritz 1934 London.jpg
- File:Fokker,Adriaan Daniel 1934 London.jpg
- File:Flügge,Siegfried 1934 London.jpg
- File:Sitte,Kurt 1934 London.jpg
- File:Perrin,Francis 1934 London.jpg
- File:Hückel,Erich 1934 London.jpg
- File:Richardson,Owen Willans 1934 London.jpg
- File:Joliot-Curie,Frédéric 1934 London.jpg
- File:Brode,Robert 1934 London.jpg
- File:Casimir,Hendrik 1934 London.jpg
- File:Smekal,Adolf 1934 London.jpg
- File:Bernal,John Desmond 1934 London.jpg
- File:Lyman,Theodore 1934 London.jpg
- File:Orowan,Egon 1934 London.jpg
- File:Blackett,Patrick 1934 London.jpg
- File:Rozenthal,Stefan 1934 London.jpg
- File:Wick,Gian Carlo 1934 London.jpg
- File:The Royal Society 1934 London-3.jpg
- File:The Royal Society 1934 London-4.jpg
- File:Knudsen,Martin 1934 London.jpg
- File:Darwin,Charles Galton 1934 London.jpg
- File:Curie Joliot 1934 London.jpg
- File:J.D. Bernal (cropped).jpg
- File:Lennard-Jones,John 1934 London.jpg
- File:Holtsmark,Johan Peter 1934 London.jpg
- File:Wang Ganchang 1934 London.jpg
- File:Andrade,Edward 1934 London.jpg
- File:Fowler,Ralph Howard 1934 London.jpg
- File:Ernst Carl Gerlach Stückelberg (1934, London).jpg
- File:Joliot-Curie,Irène 1934 London.jpg
- File:John Cunningham McLennan 1934 London.jpg
- File:Schrödinger,Erwin 1934 London.jpg
- File:Manneback,Charles 1934 London.jpg
- File:Compton,Arthur Holly 1934 London.jpg
- File:Slater,John C. 1934 London.jpg
- File:Blas Cabrera Felipe 1934 London.jpg
- File:Strutt,Robert,4th Baron Rayleigh 1934 London.jpg
- File:Bjerknes,Vilhelm 1934 London.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Rosenzweig τ 17:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- According to the summary at File:The Royal Society 1934 London-t.jpg, the photo was in the inheritance from en:Friedrich Hund to (his son,) de:Gerhard Hund, a.k.a. user GFHund, the uploader. Maybe he can answer the above questions. I'd guess that {{PD-UK-unknown}} applies since the photograph
was made available to the public ... before 1 January 1953
(2nd item at Template:PD-UK-unknown), viz. in 1934. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 17:37, 6 August 2023 (UTC)- Does it really apply though? The template PD-UK-unknown specifies that “This tag can be used only when the author cannot be ascertained by reasonable enquiry. If you wish to rely on it, please specify in the image description the research you have carried out to find who the author was.” I don't see any evidence for this research. --Rosenzweig τ 17:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- PD-UK-unknown is the correct license. "I don't see any evidence for this research" Tineye and Google image search looked at over 10 billion images and did not find the name of a photographer, the search took a few nanoseconds, and anyone can do it. Acting like you need to document your trek through all the world's image archives on foot to prove a negative, is just silly. --RAN (talk) 18:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- So you apparently think research that goes beyond a quick TinEye/Google Images search is "silly"? Well, I don't. The internet may have billions of images, but not every information about 1934 photographs is available on the Internet. Considering that the current UK copyright act is from 1988, from before the invention of the World Wide Web, it seems reasonable to assume that a quick Google search (or even less) is not what the lawmakers had in mind when they wrote "reasonable inquiry" into the law. You would have needed to consult books, make telephone calls, write letters etc. to inquire about who an author would be. If you can find out the author these days by a quick internet search, fine. But if you cannot, shouldn't you try to exhaust some conventional resources too? Records? Literature? --Rosenzweig τ 07:46, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Clear-cut case. Mentioning of London Panoramic Company (down right) makes clear that copyright was owned by London Panoramic Coy (until 2005 or so). Photo published more than 70 years ago, so PD-UK-unknown. Vysotsky (talk) 19:20, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- If you have more info on London Panoramic Company, please create a Wikidata entry for them. --RAN (talk) 02:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Vysotsky: Copyright might have been owned by this company, but the duration of the actual copyright term in the UK is still determined by the year the author died, and the author is a human being, not a company. You also did not address the URAA issue, which says this image is still protected in the US. --Rosenzweig τ 04:29, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment: I suggest to ask the conference organizer, The Royal Society, whether they have any information about the photographer. This may be the easiest way to settle the above discussion (luckily the conference organizer still exists after 89 years). I'm willing to do this, but I need some initial help with the appropriate Wikipedia procedures: Can I use OTRS for this purpose? If yes, could someone provide me a link to the tutorial page (I found Category:Open-source Ticket Request System which gives two -identical- redlinks, Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard where I don't dare to ask my bloody-beginner's question, and Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard/FAQ which doesn't address my question). If no, how should I proceed to prove my efforts without publishing my E-Mail address here? - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 09:09, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Photographic (press) agencies employ photographers. Copyright is with the photo press agency, unless otherwise negotiated. The photographs are "commissioned works". Good example is Anefo, a Dutch photo press agency of which Commons holds 450,000 photographs dating from the years 1945-1990, partly made by still living photographers. The situation in the UK is roughly the same. "Under the Copyright Act 1956, "commissioning" is defined as "the payment or agreement to pay for a work with money or something of equivalent value." "This means, the copyright in a work made by an artist while employed remains with the employer (the commissioner)." Consequently, copyright ends 70 years after publication. URAA? I don't see the London Panoramic Company has registered a URAA request here. They are also not likely to do so in the future, as I don't believe the company still exists. (I checked 5 photo museums, societies and libraries, a.o. V&A, RPS & NSMM.) Vysotsky (talk) 09:28, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Addition: I would be surprised if The Royal Society would know the name of the photographer, but, as said, copyright in this commissioned work is not with the photographer, but with the London Panoramic Coy, mentioned in the photograph. Vysotsky (talk) 09:31, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Vysotsky: Section 9 ("Authorship of work.") of the current en:Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 says "In this Part “author”, in relation to a work, means the person who creates it." Section 12 ("Duration of copyright in literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works.") says "Copyright expires at the end of the period of 70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the author dies, subject as follows.", followed by some more detailed rules for special types of works. Accd. to section 4 ("Artistic works."), photographs are artistic works. So it is clear: The author of a photograph in the UK is a human being, not some sort of corporate entity, company or such, and copyright expires 70 years after the death of that person. --Rosenzweig τ 11:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- And you're probably referring to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United Kingdom#Commissioned works, where it says “The copyrights in the commissioned works made prior to 1 August 1989 are generally held by the commissioners.” Held by. That does not change the rules about the duration of the copyright term, which is tied to the author, a human being, as explained above.
- As for the URAA: Nobody needed to apply for restoration of US copyright or request it. Restoration was automatic if the conditions were met. --Rosenzweig τ 11:27, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- I beg to differ. Of course copyright can be with a photo agency under UK Law. This point is strengthened by the fact that the name of the photographer isn't mentioned, whereas the name and address of the London Panoramic Company is. In my view copyright has expired, and as the London Panoramic Company has ceased to exist, this discussion about the copyright of photo with a 1934 publication date is rather hypothetical. Vysotsky (talk) 10:19, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- You still don't get the point. Even if the copyright is owned by a company (which is possible, I didn't say otherwise), the duration of the copyright term is still tied to the person of the author and when they died. --Rosenzweig τ 11:36, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- Of course I got that point. But this is a commissioned work of which the name of the photographer is unknown, so we have to go by the publication date plus 70, making the photo PD as of 2005. ("If the work is a photograph with an unknown author taken before 1 June 1957 then copyright expires 70 years after creation or, if during that period the work is made available to the public, 70 years after that.") Vysotsky (talk) 14:15, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- I doubt it, because the thing you're writing about now is not the same thing you were writing about before.
- Of course I got that point. But this is a commissioned work of which the name of the photographer is unknown, so we have to go by the publication date plus 70, making the photo PD as of 2005. ("If the work is a photograph with an unknown author taken before 1 June 1957 then copyright expires 70 years after creation or, if during that period the work is made available to the public, 70 years after that.") Vysotsky (talk) 14:15, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- You still don't get the point. Even if the copyright is owned by a company (which is possible, I didn't say otherwise), the duration of the copyright term is still tied to the person of the author and when they died. --Rosenzweig τ 11:36, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- Before, you were arguing that copyright ends after 70 years because copyright remains / rests with the commissioner. That would include commissioned works where the author (photographer) is known, even if they did not die the same the year the photograph was commissioned, but at a later point—which would most likely be the majority of all cases. I have explained in detail, several times, that this is not what is in the law.
- Now, you are arguing that copyrights ends after 70 years because the author is unknown. That is precisely what was already discussed above regarding the template {{PD-UK-unknown}}, and it has nothing to do with commissioned works or who owns the copyright. The question is if that template is applicable because it demands "reasonable inquiry" before you can declare that the author is unknown, and the uploader has demonstrated no inquiry at all.
- But either way, it's pretty clear that the photograph was protected in the UK on the URAA date January 1, 1996 and is therefore still protected in the USA until the end of 2029. --Rosenzweig τ 18:00, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- All hypothetical. No photographer known, and a company that doesn't exist anymore can't claim copyright -not even on the basis of URAA. You gave your arguments, I gave mine. Vysotsky (talk) 18:29, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- Even if the company does not exist anymore, somebody always owns existing copyrights, even if we do not know who it is. And you do know Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle, right? “Also, arguments that amount to "we can get away with it", such as the following, are against Commons' aims: [...] "Nobody knows who the copyright owner is, so it really doesn’t matter."” --Rosenzweig τ 05:38, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
- I don't like being accused of saying things that I haven't said or suggested. I spent a few hours trying to figure out the whereabouts of the London Panoramic Company (at the websites of the Victoria & Albert Museum, of The Royal Photographic Society, of the National Science and Media Museum and other organisations, as stated above,) and couldn't find anything. I like due diligence, and act accordingly. Vysotsky (talk) 09:32, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
- Even if the company does not exist anymore, somebody always owns existing copyrights, even if we do not know who it is. And you do know Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle, right? “Also, arguments that amount to "we can get away with it", such as the following, are against Commons' aims: [...] "Nobody knows who the copyright owner is, so it really doesn’t matter."” --Rosenzweig τ 05:38, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
- All hypothetical. No photographer known, and a company that doesn't exist anymore can't claim copyright -not even on the basis of URAA. You gave your arguments, I gave mine. Vysotsky (talk) 18:29, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- But either way, it's pretty clear that the photograph was protected in the UK on the URAA date January 1, 1996 and is therefore still protected in the USA until the end of 2029. --Rosenzweig τ 18:00, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep per Vysotsky. Most copyrights have been abandoned, "Analysis from the New York Public Library revealed that approximately 75% of copyrights for books were not renewed between 1923-1964, meaning roughly 480,000 books from this period are most likely in the public domain." That is just for USA books from 1923-1964. --RAN (talk) 01:11, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- There was no need to renew copyrights in the UK, nor was there a need to renew US copyrights that were restored by the URAA. --Rosenzweig τ 07:35, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: URAA applies, it appears per discussion that some research has been done so I'm setting an undelete date of 2030. --Abzeronow (talk) 18:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/"Ornithological Congress Oxford"
[edit]Same problem as in Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with "The Royal Society 1934 London": The photo was taken in 1934 in Oxford, UK, by the London Panoramic Company (abbreviated as London Panoramic Coy.). Do we know anything about the actual photographer(s) of this company? Years of death? Can we (at some point) use {{PD-UK-unknown}} for the file, was the required research to use it done? Or should the file only be undeleted in 2055 with {{PD-old-assumed}}?
A 1934 UK photograph was still protected on the URAA date for the UK, so these files are still protected in the US until the end of 2029, and they should be deleted in any case. The question is if undeletion can happen in 2030 ({{PD-UK-unknown}} and {{PD-US-expired}}) or 2055 ({{PD-old-assumed-expired}}).
- File:Ornithological Congress Oxford.jpg
- File:Erwin Stresemann 1934.jpg
- File:Ornithological Congress Oxford.tif
- File:Percy Lowe 1934.jpg
Rosenzweig τ 17:25, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: URAA applies, Undelete in 2030. --Abzeronow (talk) 18:09, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
wrong date, probably copyright violation Xocolatl (talk) 17:47, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Фото из семейного архива (автор - дочь Алексея Ярмольского Элеонора Павленко)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Eleonora1948 (talk • contribs) 11:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:41, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Kadı as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: CopyVio "Copyright 2021. All rights reserved." in metadata
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as such an entry might just be default of the camera/phone. This needs to be supported by external hits, which seem not to be available. (Only external hit I found is a cropped version at https://www.istanbuldoga.net/Etkinlik_2496.py). -- Túrelio (talk) 19:18, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: No indication that the copyright statement is by someone other than the uploader. —holly {chat} 17:56, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Realise this image shows too much detail with various logos, and may therefore not be in line with copyright policy. LightPhoenix (talk) 19:22, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: FOP in Singapore doesn't cover signs. --Abzeronow (talk) 18:15, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Realise this image shows too much detail with various logos, and may therefore not be in line with copyright policy. LightPhoenix (talk) 19:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: FOP in Belgium doesn't cover signs. --Abzeronow (talk) 18:16, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Realise this image is a promotional image, and may clash with copyright policy. My apologies. LightPhoenix (talk) 19:24, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Covered by FOP. --Abzeronow (talk) 18:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Similar to UK, no freedom of panorama for "graphic works" in Singapore A1Cafel (talk) 03:12, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per COM:FOP Singapore. --BrightRaven (talk) 09:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Contains a logo.In hindsight unsure about this upload. LightPhoenix (talk) 19:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep De minimis. —holly {chat} 17:57, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per Holly. --Abzeronow (talk) 18:21, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Singapore Botanic Gardens - Woollerton Gate entrance sign on Woollerton Drive -2022-12-14.jpg
[edit]
Contains a logo.In hindsight unsure about this upload. My apologies to the Commons admins (again). LightPhoenix (talk) 19:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- This one seems de minimis. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:55, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: I agree with Ikan, copyrightable element seems de minimis. --Abzeronow (talk) 18:22, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Low quality and repetitive Mv1388 (talk) 03:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Dear @Mv1388: , this is an image of the lion and sun flag in an old Shahname (Safavid era) which showed its painter used a contemporary flag as an old flag of Iranina mythological characters. If you are familiar with a better copy of such painting in wikimedia Commons, please introduce to me as I used this painting in the Persian article of Flag of Iran. Shfarshid (talk) 08:04, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Tiny! Who took the photo? I assume it wasn't you, but you should state on the page who it was. But if you did shoot the photo, please provide the full-sized version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:16, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- What do you mean by tiny? There is no shame in taking such image. I used this image appropriately in an article about the "Flag of Iran". I explained the signifance of this image and why it is needed to have it. You just focused on the low resolution of this image. It is not fair to delete an image just based on the resolution of it. Do you have any other reason? Can you reason why this image is not important and not needed in Wikimedia Commons? Shfarshid (talk) 00:09, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Shfarshid, who shot the photo? Please start by answering that question. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:53, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Hi dear, your image is not from Shahnameh Rashida and it have the low quality and I found the right source and uploaded it in the Flag of Iran article. Mv1388 (talk) 04:58, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. It looks to me like you did things the right way, but I still have one question about the image you uploaded: is the photo over 30 years old, or are you relying on law regarding faithful reproductions of works of flat art? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:03, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
@Mv1388: Thank you for uploading the high quality version of this painting. My source is this Persian article. In this article, the source the "Rashida Shahnameh" was mentioned as the painting's source. May be the article authors made mistake or this painting was copied in the handwritten Shahnameh that you introduced. Shfarshid (talk) 00:15, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
- Your welcome, Rashida Shahnameh is in Golestan Palace Museum and this artical made a mistake. Thank you for your attention. Mv1388 (talk) 02:22, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
Kept: in use. --Krd 09:12, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ocelot as Copyvio (SD) and the most recent rationale was: F1|Non-free logo. Leaning Keep, opinions on COM:TOO US and COM:TOO Andean Community? —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 03:26, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:12, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Contains a logo.In hindsight unsure about this upload. My apologies. LightPhoenix (talk) 19:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:13, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Maud Tindal Atkinson
[edit]The British artist Maud Tindal Atkinson died in 1954, so these works of art are not in the public domain in the UK yet, and the files should be deleted. The files can be restored in 2025 (no URAA problem as far as I can determine).
- File:Ariel Atkinson.jpg
- File:Atkinson Sir Galahad.jpg
- File:Children reading - Hollow Tree (cropped).jpg
- File:Hollow Tree.jpg
- File:Portrait Tommy.jpg
- File:Rose still life.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Rosenzweig τ 20:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep, these two - File:Hollow Tree.jpg and its cropped (extracted) version File:Children reading - Hollow Tree (cropped).jpg The simple, lack of detail and few colors of the book's cover art is not a work by the talented Maud Tindal Atkinson. This 1907 book cover is not signed by the artist, while one artwork is signed and two more have the artist's mark on the lower right corners. So, keep these two and undeleted the rest in 2025 per @Rosenzweig. Thanks, -- Ooligan (talk) 08:47, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
- Then which artist created that cover? If there was no research done on this, these files showing a 1907 book cover should be deleted per the precautionary principle and can be restored in 2028 with {{PD-old-assumed}}. --Rosenzweig τ 08:58, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
- Per COM:AW, "
- United Kingdom
- If the author is unknown then the basic time period to bear in mind is 70 years. (...) If the work was published before 30 August 1989 then copyright expires 70 years after first publication." --Ooligan (talk) 00:00, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- You're the one claiming that the author is "unknown", while we actually have a credit to Maud Tindal Atkinson. Also, {{PD-UK-unknown}} requires "reasonable enquiry". Which research have you carried out to find who the author was? --Rosenzweig τ 00:52, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Then which artist created that cover? If there was no research done on this, these files showing a 1907 book cover should be deleted per the precautionary principle and can be restored in 2028 with {{PD-old-assumed}}. --Rosenzweig τ 08:58, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:14, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
- Undeleted: 4 undeleted, 2 will wait for 2028. Abzeronow (talk) 01:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
No information about TOO in Bulgaria QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 21:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
- Keep There's no information, but this one seems far too simple. PD-textlogo. —holly {chat} 17:59, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Krd 09:12, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
