Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2023/09/09
 |
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}
_-_Vue_contre-plongée_Immeuble_Les_Érables_(août_2022).jpg){kind=link}
_-_Vue_rapprochée_balcons_Immeuble_Les_Érables_(août_2022).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![130 File:Kijów - Pecherska Ławra i "Matka Ojczyzna" - Kiev - Pechersk Lavra and "Mather Home" - panoramio.jpg](#File:Kijów_-_Pecherska_Ławra_i_"Matka_Ojczyzna"_-_Kiev_-_Pechersk_Lavra_and_"Mather_Home"_-_panoramio.jpg){kind=link}
_(001).jpg){kind=link}
_(002).jpg){kind=link}
_in_1967.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
_(14).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Photo is expectly from Mapherson, delete unless the author is live in there
除非作者居住於麥花巨，否則照片須隨時刪除 — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.217.189.221 (talk) 02:24, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Keep. Big photo with metadata, seems own work. Nominator is blocked as sockpuppet. Taivo (talk) 08:30, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
Delete argee with Mafalda4144, ad photo 103.250.52.218 08:03, 29 October 2022 (UTC)- Keep, no reason to believe that the uploader didn't take the photo. Belbury (talk) 08:11, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
- Delete support Mafalda4144 103.250.52.218 08:14, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
- This photo is uploaded by a sock puppet of Cheng123xx, Wing1991hk 103.250.52.218 08:45, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
- The uploader, since renamed to User:Wpcpey, is not blocked or tagged for any sockpuppetry. --Belbury (talk) 08:58, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
Speedy keep Vandalism. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:27, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:36, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
Vandalism only, self edited and diracted 103.250.52.218 07:32, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Vandalism, IP blocked. --Achim55 (talk) 14:16, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
i want to delete this PulzeHealthClinic (talk) 09:36, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 15:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
from a banned user: User:Miggy72 is banned globally plus nonfree due to youtube Gorgylesav (talk) 00:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by The Squirrel Conspiracy. --Rosenzweig τ 20:09, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
I have uploaded the wrong image, please delete it as soon as possible. Nophotos1992 (talk) 06:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Nophotos1992:
Comment 
Put up for speedy deletion per F10 and G7, removed spam deletion requests. --QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 15:37, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
By Mistake, I have uploaded the wrong image which is personal, requesting you to please delete is as soon as possible Nophotos1992 (talk) 17:11, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 19:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
I have uploaded the wrong image, please delete it as soon as possible. Nophotos1992 (talk) 06:09, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Nophotos1992: Comment Put up for speedy deletion per F10 and G7, removed spam deletion requests. --QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 15:37, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
By Mistake, I have uploaded the wrong image which is personal, requesting you to please delete is as soon as possible Nophotos1992 (talk) 17:12, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 19:54, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
I have uploaded the wrong image, please delete it as soon as possible. Nophotos1992 (talk) 06:05, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Nophotos1992: Comment Put up for speedy deletion per F10 and G7, removed spam deletion requests. --QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 15:37, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
By Mistake, I have uploaded the wrong image which is personal, requesting you to please delete is as soon as possible Nophotos1992 (talk) 17:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 19:57, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
I have uploaded the wrong image, please delete it as soon as possible. Nophotos1992 (talk) 06:08, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Nophotos1992: Comment Put up for speedy deletion per F10 and G7, removed spam deletion requests. --QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 15:38, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
By Mistake, I have uploaded the wrong image which is personal, requesting you to please delete is as soon as possible Nophotos1992 (talk) 17:11, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 19:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
I have uploaded the wrong image, please delete it as soon as possible. Nophotos1992 (talk) 06:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Nophotos1992: Comment Put up for speedy deletion per F10 and G7, removed spam deletion requests. --QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 15:38, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
By Mistake, I have uploaded the wrong image which is personal, requesting you to please delete is as soon as possible Nophotos1992 (talk) 17:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 19:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
I have uploaded the wrong image, please delete it as soon as possible. Nophotos1992 (talk) 06:05, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Nophotos1992: Comment Put up for speedy deletion per F10 and G7, removed spam deletion requests. --QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 15:39, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
By Mistake, I have uploaded the wrong image which is personal, requesting you to please delete is as soon as possible Nophotos1992 (talk) 17:09, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 19:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
I have uploaded the wrong image, please delete it as soon as possible. Nophotos1992 (talk) 06:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Nophotos1992: Comment Put up for speedy deletion per F10 and G7, removed spam deletion requests. --QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 15:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
By Mistake, I have uploaded the wrong image which is personal, requesting you to please delete is as soon as possible Nophotos1992 (talk) 17:08, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 19:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Admitted copyright violation from starofmysore.com Acabashi (talk) 11:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Marcus Cyron. --Rosenzweig τ 20:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
CopyVio Google Maps Hinnerk11 (talk) 23:24, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, obvious copyvio. --Rosenzweig τ 07:47, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
COM:SPAM. low quarity image. same and good quarity image is in File:Heibon-pp.10-11.jpg. eien20 (talk) 19:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Polarlys. --Rosenzweig τ 07:54, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
duplicate (File:Generals Pyongyang MigitaToshihide October1894.jpg) and low quarity. eien20 (talk) 19:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Polarlys. --Rosenzweig τ 07:54, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
CpvyVio from Bing Hinnerk11 (talk) 23:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, obvious copyvio. --Rosenzweig τ 07:52, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Very odd indeed, Olivier Jacob is also found by Google Lens as Samuel Mimouni - see https://fr.linkedin.com/in/samuel-mimouni-897560223?trk=people-guest_people_search-card Obviously this needs to be resolved, hence this discussion. Strong suggestion that COM:VRT be used to declare the provenance and permissions. COM:PCP applies 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 21:31, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Fitindia. --Rosenzweig τ 09:11, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
image taken from internet (Minecraft). Source: https://www.planetminecraft.com/texture-pack/the-backrooms-texture-pack/ ZimskoSonce (talk) 16:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 15:33, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
image taken from internet (Minecraft). Source: https://www.planetminecraft.com/texture-pack/the-backrooms-texture-pack/ ZimskoSonce (talk) 16:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 15:33, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
this subpage shouldn't exist; it was created by accident ⇒ Zhing-Za, they/them, 16:12, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Achim55 (talk) 19:27, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Not in COM:SCOPE. Günther Frager (talk) 20:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hey this my work that I did on a computer, i.e. adobe website to promote my app in the app store, and google play store. This photo can be found on our app page and showcases one of the features on our app
- https://apps.apple.com/app/koktailz/id1617331971?platform=iphone
- https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.koktailz.app 2601:244:4000:C560:E881:9FF9:9974:197D 06:32, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Commons is no a place for advertisements. Such files are not in scope. Günther Frager (talk) 08:13, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: G10. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Porque quiero Bayleef shiny2 (talk) 00:42, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy delete por COM:G7. ClydeFranklin (talk) 03:09, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 08:21, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
The sculpture was completed in 1991 by Gyula Kosice (1924–2016). There is no freedom of panorama in Argentina for non-architectural works. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2087 A1Cafel (talk) 02:57, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:15, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
This images is credited by its source to the "Jefferson County Sherriff". The individual, per the source, was arrested in Alabama, so this would appear to be a work of an employee or officer of a subdivision of Alabama. While employees and officers of the federal government do not obtain copyright protection on their works when acting in that capacity, the same is not generally true for those of U.S. state and local governments. Indeed, Alabama does not appear to be a state that automatically releases its works into the public domain. While some projects (such as the English Wikipedia) allow for local uploads to be made under claims of qualified fair use, Commons does not. As such, and in light of COM:PRP, this file should be deleted for lacking evidence of permission from the copyright holder to release the file under a suitable free license. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:05, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:15, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
This image is credited to the New Jersey Department of Corrections, and I agree that it is likely that an employee thereof took this photograph. While employees and officers of the federal government do not obtain copyright protection on their works when acting in that capacity, the same is not generally true for those of U.S. state and local governments. Indeed, New Jersey does not appear to be a state that automatically releases its works into the public domain. While some projects (such as the English Wikipedia) allow for local uploads to be made under claims of qualified fair use, Commons does not. As such, and in light of COM:PRP, this file should be deleted for lacking evidence of permission from the copyright holder to release the file under a suitable free license. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:06, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:15, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
The uploader claims that this photograph was taken by "Brazos County Law Enforcement" in 2022, and that the file was released under CC-BY-SA 4.0 international. However, I think this is lacking evidence of permission from the copyright holder; works created by the Texas government do not appear to automatically lapse into the public domain, so we'd need evidence of the license being valid for this to be hosted. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:12, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
The author of this photo is listed as "Anne Arundel County Police Department" (this matches the attribution given by WaPo). That is a police department of the State of Maryland, not a federal agency. While no copyright vests in the works created by federal government officers and employees in the course of their duties, the same is not generally true of officials and employees of state and local governments. Indeed, Maryland does not appear to be a state that waives copyright protections on its works. And, while some projects (such as EnWiki) have an exemption doctrine policy that allows for some works to be uploaded under claims of fair use, Commons does not. As such, this file should be deleted in light of COM:PRP for lacking evidence of a release under a valid and suitable free license from the copyright holder. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:17, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in France A1Cafel (talk) 03:21, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in France A1Cafel (talk) 03:21, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Uploader is unlikely the photopgrapher and the given date is funny, 2023 - for a man who's dead since 2007 he looks very good! https://hjck.com/musica/la-musica-de-diciembre-seleccionada-por-la-hjck-ex40 Marcus Cyron (talk) 03:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
_-_Vue_contre-plong%C3%A9e_Immeuble_Les_%C3%89rables_(ao%C3%BBt_2022).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_Vue_contre-plong%C3%A9e_Immeuble_Les_%C3%89rables_(ao%C3%BBt_2022).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP in France, architect Jean Dubuisson died in 2011 A1Cafel (talk) 03:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
_-_Vue_rapproch%C3%A9e_balcons_Immeuble_Les_%C3%89rables_(ao%C3%BBt_2022).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_Vue_rapproch%C3%A9e_balcons_Immeuble_Les_%C3%89rables_(ao%C3%BBt_2022).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP in France, architect Jean Dubuisson died in 2011 A1Cafel (talk) 03:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No FoP for 3D works in Taiwan, artist YuYu Yang died in 1997 A1Cafel (talk) 03:57, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Laos A1Cafel (talk) 04:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Laos A1Cafel (talk) 04:11, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in Georgia A1Cafel (talk) 04:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in Georgia A1Cafel (talk) 04:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
No FoP in Laos. The monument was completed in 2009, and the artist is unlikely to be dead for 50 years A1Cafel (talk) 04:31, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Personal file by non-contributor. Out of scope. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:36, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 04:45, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 04:49, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 04:50, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 04:52, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Kazakhstan A1Cafel (talk) 04:54, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 04:57, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 05:06, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Sri Lanka, permission from the artist(s) is required A1Cafel (talk) 06:57, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Dark and useless file, author request ~Moheen (keep talking) 08:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Dark and useless file, author request ~Moheen (keep talking) 09:08, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Blurr and unused file. Author request. ~Moheen (keep talking) 10:24, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This is claimed to be a postcard from 1935, but it is quite clearly the photo appearing here with a lower resolution. Nowhere on the source website it is claimed that the photo is a postcard, and there is no information on the original date. This is certainly not cc-by-sa, as claimed, and I am not sure it is PD-old. Jaqen (talk) 13:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:25, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Dark and useless file, author request ~Moheen (keep talking) 14:47, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons:What Commons is not#Wikimedia Commons is not your personal free web host. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons:What Commons is not#Wikimedia Commons is not your personal free web host. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons:What Commons is not#Wikimedia Commons is not your personal free web host. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons:What Commons is not#Wikimedia Commons is not your personal free web host. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:00, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:18, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Work by living sculptor Junichi Matsumoto (松本純一). Not in PD, and COM:FOP Japan doesn't allow such artworks. Yasu (talk) 15:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons:What Commons is not#Wikimedia Commons is not your personal free web host. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:16, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons:What Commons is not#Wikimedia Commons is not your personal free web host. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:17, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
This is a fan-made title card for en:Bangla - La serie. It is not an accurate representation of the titling text font. See the poster on IMDB which uses a different font with different characteristics including kerning. This is most apparent on the G which uses a downward stem not present in the poster titling. Commons should not be hosting misreprentations. Whpq (talk) 15:32, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 15:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 15:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 15:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Dark and useless version. There is already a clean and useful version of the same category. Author's request. ~Moheen (keep talking) 16:12, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Dark and useless version. There is already a clean and useful version of the same category. Author's request. ~Moheen (keep talking) 16:12, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Artwork from a living Greek artist. Needs COM:VRT permission from the artist. Abzeronow (talk) 17:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
The resolution and lack of other uploads by this user makes it seem suspicious. FunkMonk (talk) 21:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Might be above COM:TOO Argentina. Might be below if the crown is cropped out. I can crop it if that makes it possible to be kept. Jonteemil (talk) 21:53, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Might be above COM:TOO El Salvador which doesn't exist. Jonteemil (talk) 21:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Might be above COM:TOO Andean Community which is a bit hard to interpret. Jonteemil (talk) 21:59, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Might be above COM:TOO Andean Community which is a bit hard to interpret. Jonteemil (talk) 22:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Might be above COM:TOO Andean Community which is a bit hard to interpret. Jonteemil (talk) 22:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Out of com:scope. Logo designed by me for my football team We would also need proof of this. Jonteemil (talk) 22:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Low quality image, no foreseeable educational use. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 23:09, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:20, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
not free for commercial use Aurelienaumond (talk) 14:21, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; no FoP; not out of copyright. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:08, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in France A1Cafel (talk) 03:25, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in France A1Cafel (talk) 03:26, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep de minimi here ? It's a landscape with several different buildings and a park in the foreground. The subject of the photo is more the view of a district rather than that of a specific architectural work.
- Micka13 (talk) 22:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: de minimis. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:02, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
BAD INFORMATION AC.DC.Drives (talk) 03:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- You uploaded it. Correct the information. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:47, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per IK. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:02, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake ADWAITH PV 1225 (talk) 02:01, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 06:52, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
personal selfie Ajeeshkumar4u (talk) 03:59, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:03, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bmansheridan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons:What Commons is not#Wikimedia Commons is not your personal free web host. Not used.
- File:Office Pic.jpg
- File:Brian Matthew Sheridan Professional Picture.jpg
- File:Brian Matthew Sheridan Photo.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:54, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted per above. -- CptViraj (talk) 20:58, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Object shows
[edit]Out of scope per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Battle for Dream Island. They were previously used at simple:Pentagon, but IMO that use was not made in good faith - the history of that page shows that the Simple English community doesn't truly want these images and instead they flew under the radar.
- File:BFSU Werecat Pentagon.svg
- File:BFSU Weredog Pentagon.svg
- File:BFSU Werefox Pentagon.svg
- File:BFSU Werewolf Pentagon.svg
* Pppery * it has begun... 23:05, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Like I said earlier, speedy delete all that are unnecessary. - The Harvett Vault | he/him | user | talk - 00:19, 10 September 2023 (UTC); edited: 00:22, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy delete 118.148.100.215 01:15, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:04, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Low quality diagram, not used, two alternative files in Category:Methcathinone. Wostr (talk) 12:32, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete, unused {{Low quality chem}}. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 08:18, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Low-quality chemical structure in small resolution & pixelated bonds/atoms. — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 06:07, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Leyo 20:01, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Not used anymore, except for in Tryphon's subpage about low quality chemical diagrams. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 17:52, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete we have File:Microwave reduction of nitro arenes.svg as a better replacement of this scheme. Wostr (talk) 17:59, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom & as we have a proper replacement. — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 07:31, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Leyo 20:03, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
With the image in the section title, I thereby also nominate:
Chemical structures that are {{BadJPG}}. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 18:16, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Leyo 20:06, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Structure of sodium ethoxide drawn in a way that suggests covalent bond between oxygen and sodium atoms, we have proper alternatives in Category:Sodium ethoxide. Not used. Wostr (talk) 20:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. This depiction style is indeed unfavorable because the compound is ionic. — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 15:19, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Leyo 20:04, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Poor quality chem diagram, one of Claudio Pistilli's files, not used. Wostr (talk) 21:39, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 15:17, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Leyo 20:04, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
and File:Brian Films (218358058).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons:What Commons is not#Wikimedia Commons is not your personal free web host. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Alaa :)..! 17:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons:What Commons is not#Wikimedia Commons is not your personal free web host. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:03, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Alaa :)..! 17:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Personal photo without an educational value. Günther Frager (talk) 19:32, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Alaa :)..! 17:55, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by JAMES K. NJIRU (talk · contribs)
[edit]Commons is not your personal free web host. No contributions to wm projects.
- File:JAMES NJIRU.jpg
- File:JAMES KARIUKI.jpg
- File:J. K.jpg
- File:J K. NJIRU.jpg
- File:NJIRU.jpg
- File:JAMES K. BF.jpg
- File:KARISH BF.jpg
- File:KARIUKI N.jpg
- File:JAMES K. N.jpg
- File:JAMES K. NJ.jpg
- File:NJIRU K.jpg
- File:JIM REEVES.jpg
- File:K. J.jpg
- File:NJIRU JAMES.jpg
- File:J .K. NJIRU.jpg
- File:KARIUKI NJIRU.jpg
- File:JAMES K. NJIRU.jpg
- File:J. KARIUKI.jpg
- File:JAMES KARIUKI N.jpg
Achim55 (talk) 20:35, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Alaa :)..! 17:56, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
Je ne voulais pas l'upload sur le wikimedia anglais Remsaki (talk) 23:38, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- The person who uploaded it does not have copyrights on this logo. They probably wanted to upload it on french wikipedia because logos are allowed to be used to represent a trademark in French law. Escargot bleu (talk) 09:06, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- The question is whether the logo is above COM:TOO Japan. I would say it does have an "artistic appearance that is worth artistic appreciation", but on the other hand, "Logos composed merely of geometric shapes and texts are also not copyrightable in general" could argue against it being copyrightable. So I punt the decision to the closing admin, but I don't think it's obvious. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:40, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Still no license. Uncertain copyright. --Yann (talk) 14:14, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
Files by Arianna0716
[edit]This user uploaded 13 pictures for making this edition in a single article. I have just deleted 8 of them as being found on other websites. I believe that the rest of these files are also not an own work. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 00:32, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- File:Pooldeck-cdc.jpg
- File:Winart05.jpg
- File:Building after ps 2048.jpg
- File:Interior 01.jpg
- File:Cb223.jpg
Deleted: per nomination. --FitIndia Semi-retired 20:03, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
Possible Derivative work of Disney's Snow White Trade (talk) 16:03, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Pinging since he's so knowledgable about derivative works @Omphalographer: --Trade (talk) 16:06, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. Snow White as a general concept is in the public domain, but this image is unmistakably derivative of Disney's depiction of the character in their 1937 film and subsequent works; compare images like w:File:Snow white disney.png. To quote {{PD-algorithm}} yet again, [image generation] models can produce images that contain major copyrightable elements of those copyrighted training images, making these outputs derivative works. It is difficult for even human artists to avoid this sort of conceptual "borrowing" when creating renditions of characters with notable commercial depictions; for a computerized model, it's virtually impossible. Omphalographer (talk) 20:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete instantly recognizable as Disney’s Snow White. Dronebogus (talk) 12:33, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep I have not seen any reason for why fan art which depicts specific fictional characters would be illegal. Moreover, tons of other CCBY images depict such too. --Prototyperspective (talk) 13:40, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- I have not seen any reason why fan art which depicts specific fictional characters cannot possibly be derivative works Trade (talk) 20:34, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:DW, no "fair use" of copyrighted material on Commons. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:21, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyrighted advertisements in Taipei. Solomon203 (talk) 00:26, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:26, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Unfortunately, I'm thinking this is a copyright violation since the United States does not have FoP for sculptures and statues. PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 01:48, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, fairl recent US scupture, needs to be assumed to be copyrighted unless shown otherwise. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:27, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
This is the actual image of the city skyline. Even though there are some similarities, this is not how it looks like in real life. No EXIF data, not original file, unlikely to be the photographer. After zooming in, it does not look like a photograph but more of a computer generated image of the skyline. The username of the uploader also shows that they've been possibly blocked before. DesiBoy101 (talk) 02:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete; copyvio. Cropped and heavily stylized from https://twitter.com/josephradhik/status/1655213613601394688. See also File:Wdwdwdwdaqqs.jpg, which was deleted a few days ago as a copyvio of the Twitter image. Omphalographer (talk) 20:45, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:28, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by NatoTheVideoEditor AUTTP 2023 Est. 2011 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope: low quality flag maps. Many of these are "fake SVGs" (raster images in a SVG wrapper).
- File:Flag Map Of Colonial Africa 1914 (REUPLOAD).svg - higher quality alternatives exist like File:Flag map of Colonial Africa (1913).png. It's unclear to me that the differences between 1913 and 1914 are dramatic enough to merit a separate map.
- File:Flag Map Of Yugoslavia 1991-1992.svg - higher quality alternatives in Category:Flag maps of Yugoslavia.
- File:Flag Map Of Yugoslavia Without Slovenia & Croatia 1991-1991.svg - as above
- File:Flag Map Of Yugoslavia Without Slovenia 1991-1991.svg - as above
- File:Flag Map Of Tanzania With Lakes.svg - alternatives exist in Category:SVG flag maps of Tanzania
- File:The Hyper Accurate Flag Map Of N4z1 Occupied Europe.png - despite the name, it's unclear what point in the war this is meant to represent, nor how accurate it actually is
- File:Flag Map Of NATO.svg - alternatives in Category:Maps of NATO
- File:Sao Tome AndPrincipe Flag Map.svg - existing File:Flag-map of Sao Tome and Principe.svg crops the flag a little oddly, but that's practically unavoidable
- File:Brazil Without Title And Star Flag Map svg.png - unclear what this modified flag is meant to represent
- File:Flag-Map-Of-Bahamas.png - map appears distorted from File:Flag map of Bahamas.png
- File:Flag Map Of Italy And His Colonies 1936-1943.png - white background makes this incomprehensible
- File:Flag Map Of Chad 1973 1994.png - no clear improvement on original File:Flag-map of Chad.svg; the border previous to the w:Libya–Chad Territorial Dispute case was not well defined
- File:Flag Map Of Italy And His Colonies.png - same issues as the other Italy flag map
- File:Flag Map Of Chad (1973-1994).png - as above
- File:Flag Map Of Brazil Without Words And Star.png - as above
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Omphalographer (talk) 02:42, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete It's not even clear what the point in a lot of these maps is. Let alone are a good percentage of them high enough quality to be used anywhere. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:56, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:28, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Per this source, the statue was erected in 2015. However, the United States of America lacks freedom of panorama for statues, and the statue is clearly used in a greater-than-de minimis manner in this photograph. Commons cannot accept files uploaded under claims of fair use; files uploaded under such a claim need to be uploaded to a project with an exemption doctrine policy (such as the English Wikipedia) if it is in line with local policies, but cannot be uploaded here. As such, in light of COM:PRP, this should be deleted as a derivative work of a copyrighted non-free statue where no FOP exception would appear to apply. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:52, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:30, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Image is not at source, but even if it were, Texas does not appear to be one of those states that releases its works into the public domain. As such, if this photograph as taken by an employee or officer of the Texas Department of Correction , it would not be in the public domain, and it would lack a valid and suitable free license. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 02:57, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:30, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
No permission from the author A1Cafel (talk) 03:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:31, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Sécurité sociale (Rennes)
[edit]The building was completed in 1965 by Paul Pothier (1923–2015). There is no freedom of panorama in France. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2086.
- File:Esplanade du Général de Gaulle à Rennes.jpg
- File:L'immeuble de la securité sociale champ de mars a rennes - panoramio.jpg
- File:Sécurité sociale Rennes.JPG
- File:Tour de la Sécurité Sociale vue Avenue Janvier Rennes.jpg
A1Cafel (talk) 03:14, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:31, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Centre Alma
[edit]In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in France.
- File:Alma City Rennes.JPG
- File:La tour alma city au centre alma - panoramio.jpg
- File:Le "nouveau" centre alma a rennes - panoramio.jpg
- File:Le centre alma - panoramio (1).jpg
- File:Le centre alma - panoramio (3).jpg
- File:Rennes - Centre Alma.jpg
- File:Rennes-FR-35-centre commercial Alma-01.jpg
- File:Rennes-FR-35-centre commercial Alma-02.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
A1Cafel (talk) 03:16, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:32, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Tour de l'Éperon
[edit]The building was completed in 1975 by Louis Arretche (1905–1991). There is no freedom of panorama in France. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2062.
- File:L'immeuble " l'eperon " a rennes - panoramio (1).jpg
- File:L'immeuble " l'eperon " a rennes - panoramio.jpg
- File:L'immeuble l'eperon quartier colombier a rennes - panoramio.jpg
- File:La tour de l'eperon vue de la dalle du colombier - panoramio.jpg
- File:La tour de l'eperon vue de la dalle du colombier a rennes - panoramio.jpg
- File:Quartier du colombier a rennes - panoramio (2).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
A1Cafel (talk) 03:19, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:32, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Special Forces in Laos Memorial
[edit]No FoP for 3D works in USA, artist Marjorie Pitz is still alive
- File:Special Forces in Laos Memorial with Minnesota State Capitol.jpg
- File:Special Forces in Laos Memorial with MN Transportation Building.jpg
- File:Special Forces in Laos Memorial with MN Veterans Service Building.jpg
- File:Special Forces in Laos Memorial with State Capitol.jpg
- File:Special Forces in Laos Memorial.jpg
A1Cafel (talk) 04:00, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:33, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Seva Seva as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: It is not a symbol of the government. It is the symbol of the Ukrainian political party People's Movement (Народний РУХ). There is no threshold of originality in Ukrainian copyright law.|source=http://www.rukh.team/ - Converting to DR for review. Widely used file. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:34, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
The own work claim is obviously false, but is this simple enough for pd-textlogo? The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:49, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Speedy keep Yes, per COM:TOO US, and it's COM:INUSE. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:50, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Ikan Kekek: I'm fine with the verdict being that it's simple enough for PD-textlogo, but INUSE has no bearing on this discussion because whether or not it's within scope isn't being questioned. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 12:59, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- I know that it doesn't have a bearing on copyright, but I disagree that it's irrelevant to a deletion request discussion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:26, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: License changed to PD-text. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:36, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 04:52, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- it's from the EDGE Group social media pages. and EDGE Group website. JurgenSaidToMe (talk) 04:35, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- Then is even worse, an apparent copyright violation of the photographer. --A1Cafel (talk) 07:13, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:36, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Please delete Godofpo1127 (talk) 06:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per uploader request; unused personal photo. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:37, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Promotional use. Despite the logos being compliant with Commons policies as they are just lines, the user confesed on eswiki to be the creator of the cryptocurrency and protocol.[1] MexTDT (talk) 07:38, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, unused. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:38, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Promotional use. Despite the logos being compliant with Commons policies as they are just lines, the user confesed on eswiki to be the creator of the cryptocurrency and protocol.[2] MexTDT (talk) 07:39, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:38, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
fake license EROY (talk) 07:49, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- I read from the internet, that posters are under CC license, and selected the corresponding option in upload page. What am I supposed to do, if I wanna upload that kind of poster to the wiki? Venkalm (talk) 11:23, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- What is your evidence of the poster being under a CC license? Trade (talk) 22:47, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:38, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Source image was deleted for copyvio Culex (talk) 08:11, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:38, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Dark and useless file, author request ~Moheen (keep talking) 08:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Comment You should reassure us that images that sufficiently depict this lake will remain after all your courtesy deletion requests are honored. In this case, are there other equally usable images of boats on the lake? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:05, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep The sun obviously didn't shine that day. Such happens but that's no reason for deletion. And isn't it quite late for a courtesy deletion? -- Herbert Ortner (talk) 17:47, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- There are plenty of clear and good-resolution files for the boat and lake: Wooden boats in Kaptai Lake. ~Moheen (keep talking) 19:23, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no requirement to delete, no consensus to do so. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:39, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
No permission from the source A1Cafel (talk) 09:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:40, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
The corresponding video was found on multiple sites on Google image search (can use this link), I don't think this is the works from the China News Service (the YouTube video was uploaded one day later than those on Google image search) A1Cafel (talk) 10:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
In some case, Google search not represent anything. If the video already release by CC, we should follow this rules. If we only focus uploaded one day later than those on Google image search, there will have so many image have a risk to delete and it is not acceptable. --Wpcpey (talk) 11:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Keep. Agree with what User:Wpcpey said.--Will629 (talk) 08:19, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Keep. We don't know the original source of the video and how China News Service obtain the video. There are several possibilities. I believe that, as a professional news agency, China News Service must used the video legally and its cc is effective. Just follow the cc, it is not necessary to take the initiative to chase it. --Factrecordor (talk) 12:02, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:41, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Screenshot from Youtube collection of clips that do not belong to the uploader. mr.choppers (talk)-en- 11:31, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:41, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
взят с сайта без свободной лицензии Джекалоп (talk) 12:39, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:42, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Better version: File:Shih chien university (2).jpg Solomon203 (talk) 00:29, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: In use. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:25, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Monumento a la Democracia
[edit]The monument was completed in 2000 by Gyula Kosice (1924–2016). There is no freedom of panorama in Argentina for non-architectural works. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2087.
- File:Buenos Aires Argentina (5269207937).jpg
- File:Democracia Guyla Kosice.JPG
- File:Gyula Kosice - Democracia (2).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
A1Cafel (talk) 02:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:25, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
The monument was completed in 1927 by Alberto Bazzoni (1889–1973). There is no freedom of panorama in Italy. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2044.
- File:Giardini pubblici caratterizzati dall'imponente monumento ai caduti.jpg
- File:IT-RE-Reggio Emilia066.jpg
- File:Monumento caduti reggio emilia.jpg
- File:Piazza della vittoria Giardini pubblici Monumento ai caduti 02.JPG
- File:Piazza della Vittoria, Reggio Emilia, Italy, 2019.jpg
- File:Reggio Emilia fontana ferrari bonini e caduti guerra mondiale.JPG
- File:ReggioEMILIA 173.jpg
- File:Reggioemilia21.jpg
A1Cafel (talk) 03:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep File:Giardini pubblici caratterizzati dall'imponente monumento ai caduti.jpg and File:Piazza della vittoria Giardini pubblici Monumento ai caduti 02.JPG, since they were uploaded within the initiative Wiki Loves Monuments 2015 and 2018. The authorizations are linked in the file (here it is), whereas for general license issue see Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 in Italy/MiBAC. Keep the other images too, since the authorization was not limited to WLM and allowed everyone to photograph this monument and to share the image with a license CC-BY-SA 3.0.--Friniate (talk) 11:27, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep You still don't understand that it is an official authorisation and a legal and political assumption of responsibility, whereas you are just any user who thinks he is doing good for the project while you are wiping the slate clean with the motto 'I don't know, I don't understand, so out of caution I am deleting'. In wikipedia, I denote this attitude as problematic. Take responsibility for violating a regulation at institutional level and then pay the consequences, in Italy there is the saying 'the law does not admit ignorance'.--Threecharlie (talk) 11:33, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep The monument appears in the list of authorized monuments of Wiki loves Monuments, because it is located within the "Giardini pubblici"--Parma1983 (talk) 12:05, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep All of the premises of the gardens have been authorised by the municipality to Wikimedia Italy as part of Wiki Loves Monuments. Please, PLEASE, STOP THIS, we're tired of having to repeat the same things over and over again. Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 19:18, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete I've said it in other DRs already, but local municipalities only retain the copyright to works created on their behalf for 20 years. Then it goes back to the original author. There's also zero evidence said legal statue applies to architectural works in the first place. Although even if it does, the local mayors office who gave Wiki Love Monuments permission to take these images didn't own the copyright to the monument when these were taken and uploaded to Commons. Since it was completed in 1927, which is clearly more then 20 years ago. It's also ridiculous to act like an "agreement" between a local mayors office and random Wikipedia users has any legal standing to begin with. It clearly wouldn't in the United States regardless of it would in Italy or not. Although I don't think it would be any more legally binding in Italy then anywhere else. But there's no way the "agreement" would hold up in court if someone connected to the architect's estate sued for copyright infringement in the United States. Really, the whole thing is to vague and ambiguous to useful outside of adding the images to Italian language Wikipedia articles. Let alone is the "agreement" legally sound enough to hold up in cases of commercial usage. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:21, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- The authorization was made with the italian chapter of Wikimedia, not with a "random wikimedian", but now it's clear that you simply want to delete every image of italian monuments at all costs and with every kind of reason (some of them incorrect but at least partially defensable, some other blatantly false and that denote only bad faith). Friniate (talk) 12:33, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- And here I thought you weren't going to feed the troll. Two deletion requests aren't "every Italian monument" and I'm not even the one who nominated the images for deletion to begin with. So maybe go touch grass and lay off the straw men. Your hyperbolic, insulting comments don't add anything to the discussion. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:26, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- Well, if we would follow at least one of your 5 contradicting thesis, we should delete every image about italian monuments, so it's not hyperbolic at all. Of course if we follow the other 4 thesis there would be less deletions, but I don't know which one you are defending in this moment, since you change thesis more quickly than a 100-meter runner. I'm glad that you are admitting of being a troll though. Friniate (talk) 14:07, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- I think I've been pretty consistent throughout these couple of discussions. At least I'm not telling anyone to read a document and then insulting them and saying it's irrelevant if they do like you are. But hey, apparently one man's citing guidelines and reading an agreement after someone asked them to is another man's trolling. So what do I know? It's not like I have a law degree from Harvard or anything like you and Sannita apparently do. Clearly I'm talking to Wikipedia's best and brightest here lmao. Anyway, I'll say the same thing I did in the other discussion and hopefully you actually listen this time. I don't have anything more to say about this beyond what I have already and I'm more then willing to let the closing administrator decide how to close this based on the evidence. So I'd appreciate it if we ended it here. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 14:28, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- Well, if we would follow at least one of your 5 contradicting thesis, we should delete every image about italian monuments, so it's not hyperbolic at all. Of course if we follow the other 4 thesis there would be less deletions, but I don't know which one you are defending in this moment, since you change thesis more quickly than a 100-meter runner. I'm glad that you are admitting of being a troll though. Friniate (talk) 14:07, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- And here I thought you weren't going to feed the troll. Two deletion requests aren't "every Italian monument" and I'm not even the one who nominated the images for deletion to begin with. So maybe go touch grass and lay off the straw men. Your hyperbolic, insulting comments don't add anything to the discussion. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:26, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1 Your interpretation is not valid as you're not a lawyer. As someone who worked with Wikimedia Italy collecting authorisations from 2018 to 2022 for Wiki Loves Monuments, I know for a fact that all of the documents we sent to municipalities, institutions and private citizens were vetted by a lawyer who has experience in copyright and free licensing. Please, refrain from adding new hurdles to our work that have no legal basis whatsoever, it's pointless and it's only frustrating. You don't know how hard it is to convince people to adhere to WLM given the limitations we have in Italy, and your pointless opinions just make it more frustrating for us to carry on our work. Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 12:58, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- The authorization was made with the italian chapter of Wikimedia, not with a "random wikimedian", but now it's clear that you simply want to delete every image of italian monuments at all costs and with every kind of reason (some of them incorrect but at least partially defensable, some other blatantly false and that denote only bad faith). Friniate (talk) 12:33, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- you're not a lawyer @Sannita: The last time I checked no one here is. Nor do we need to be to participate in deletion requests. I'm sorry if you find that frustrating, but that's just how this works. Anyone can participate in discussions regardless of if they have PhDs in copyright law. Maybe just don't participate next time if you that upset by anyone besides Harvard Law grads giving their opinions. To the degree that I'm "adding new hurdles" that's on you guys for not making sure everything was totally above board and well documented before you uploaded the images to Commons.
- The guideline is what it is though and it clearly says the copyright lapses back to the original creator after 20 years. Maybe it's, but that's not on me and it has nothing to do with the DR either. Be my guest and do a proposal to have the wording of the guideline changed if you don't like it though. I could really care less. But I'm not responsible for what the guideline or law says. Anyway, no administrator is going to close this as keep just because the participants don't have law degrees. Sorry, but that's not how this works. It is on your side to provide adequate evidence for why the images should be kept, which you clearly haven't done. Pontificating about someone's lack of legal credentials clearly doesn't cut it either. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:26, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Per article 11 of the Italian Copyright Law, municipalities hold the copyright on works made on their behalf. What was linked above seems a valid permission also as regards copyright of photographs uploaded on Commons.--Ferdi2005(talk) 19:23, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Again, not much to say here: authorized monuments from the competent legal authority. --Phyrexian ɸ 11:08, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- @A1Cafel- Pinging an invitation to comment by the DR nominator.
- Keep per @Friniate, @Parma1983, @Threecharlie, @Phyrexian, @Ferdi2005, and @Sannita.
- Please, see: https://workspace.wikimedia.it/s/7wQqJ87Cy2b55oR?dir=undefined&path=%2FEmilia-Romagna%2FProvincia%20di%20Reggio%20Emilia%2FReggio%20nell%27Emilia%20(RE)%2FAdesione%20Reggio%20Emilia%20WLM%202014&openfile=70664
- and
- Wikipedia Italy - https://wiki.wikimedia.it/wiki/Chi_siamo --
- Ooligan (talk) 02:00, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:26, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
No FoP in Italy, artist Alberto Bazzoni died in 1973.
- File:Monumento al Fante (Salsomaggiore Terme) - fronte anteriore 1 2022-07-20.jpg
- File:Monumento al Fante (Salsomaggiore Terme) - fronte anteriore 2 2022-07-20.jpg
- File:Salsomaggiore terme, monumento al fante caduto, di Alberto Bazzoni, 1922, 01.jpg
- File:Salsomaggiore terme, monumento al fante caduto, di Alberto Bazzoni, 1922, 02.jpg
_-_fronte_anteriore_1_2022-07-20.jpg){kind=link}
_-_fronte_anteriore_2_2022-07-20.jpg){kind=link}
A1Cafel (talk) 03:03, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep per Wiki Loves Monuments authorisation, see here --Melos (talk) 11:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep I uploaded the images because the monument had been authorised to Wiki Loves Monuments (see also the link above)--Parma1983 (talk) 11:11, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Unless I'm missing something it looks like the authorization is for usage of the images, which doesn't really have anything to do with the copyright status of the actual monument or not. Wiki Loves Monuments is a legal body or can grant authorization on behalf of the original copyright holder of monument either. Just like if I upload an image of a copyright work to Commons and release said image under a free license so what? That doesn't actually mean the image can hosted on Commons. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:01, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1: I think you're missing something. The authorisation was granted by the municipality of Salsomaggiore Terme, which is the owner of the monument, not by WLM. Moreover, the authorisation was granted as a part of WLM (in this sense it was called a WLM authorisation), but is not limited to WLM, so Keep. --Jaqen (talk) 06:39, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1: I think you're missing something. The authorisation was granted by the municipality of Salsomaggiore Terme, which is the owner of the monument, not by WLM. Moreover, the authorisation was granted as a part of WLM (in this sense it was called a WLM authorisation), but is not limited to WLM, so
- Yeah, I don't know. This is what the Google Translation of the document says "Inn Qualita di Sandaco of the municipality of Salsomaggioree Terme communicates, in the absence of financial charges to the budget, the adhesion of the aforementioned organization to the Wiki Loves Monuments Italia project, the photographic competition that involves citizens and invites them to document the cultural heritage with photographs released under the free creation commons license." So at least going by that it sounds like the "photographs" are released under a free license. Not the monument itself. Which is essentially what I was saying. It's questionable that the city owns the copyright to the monument to begin with anyway. Just because a municipality commissions a particular work doesn't mean they then own the copyright to it. And it's not like a (probably ignorant) city employee can't just give whomever permission to do whatever they want regardless. Plenty of government workers will say someone can take a picture of something if they are asked for permission to do so. It doesn't make said permission legally binding or anything though. Nor can a local municipality override federal freedom of panorama laws just by giving a random citizen said permission. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:55, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep, there is an official permission, as linked in the description page of the file, from the competent authority. @Adamant1: is funny that you assume the ignorance of a public officer who personally signed a law-binding document in a country which laws you oviously ignore, in a language you could not read, about a file that is part of a decade old contest, with hundreds of thounsands pictures uploaded with the same kind of permissions. I would rather bet you are missing something here, not the mayor's office of this city, which obviously knows the boundaries of law about public artwork; nor the Italian Wikimedians from the local chapter, who obviously knows the law and where to ask exactly such a permission. There is no such a thing like "federal freedom of panorama laws" in Italy; actually there is no "federal whatever" in this country. Local public authority have the right to grant freedom of panorama about specific public artwork. --Phyrexian ɸ 08:01, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- OK, Phyrexian. At least according to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Italy "an agreement between the Ministry and Wikimedia has allowed in the past to publish certain photos of cultural heritage assets on Commons, provided that for the ministry-run monuments Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer is added to the respective file descriptions." The last time I checked the Ministry of the Republic of Italy is a federal agency, these files aren't licensed with Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer (in fact they are licensed as "own work" even the uploader clearly isn't the local mayors office), and Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Italy doesn't say anything about local municipalities being able to grant local Wikimedia chapters permission to take images of monuments either.
- If this was licensed as Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer then it might be a different thing, but there's clearly a difference between Ministry of the Republic of Italy granting permission for certain photos of cultural heritage assets to be uploaded to Commons and employees of local municipalities giving random users said permission. More so because the uploader is claiming the image is their own work and they clear aren't an employee of the local government. Whatever you say though. I never claimed to know everything about this. Nor is my opinion the last or only word on it. I'm just going off what the document and guidelines say. So maybe skip the condescending tone next time. It's not really helpful. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:15, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Please see Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 in Italy/MiBAC. By the way, there is no federal authority in Italy. Friniate (talk) 10:44, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- These images were taken in 2017, 2022, and have nothing to do with either the event in 2012 or MiBAC. So I don't see how your link is relevant. Also again according to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Italy and the page that you just linked to "As part of the agreement, we however have to add a disclaimer to the pictures: Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer" and none of these images are licensed with Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer. So your just making my argument for me as to why these images shouldn't be hosted on Commons since they have nothing to do with the original agreement and don't have the correct license, which is required, even if they did. You can't just claim an image taken in 2022 with the permission of a local mayor's office has anything to do with an agreement made in 2012 by the Italian Ministry of Cultural and Artistic Heritage though. That's not how it works. BTW, it doesn't even sound like the agreement is compatible with Commons to begin with, but that's another issue. Except to say images that can't be used for commercial purposes can't usually be hosted on Commons. I'm not going to press the issue though. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:55, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- It's the same initiative and the law has not changed, how on earth can you say that is not relevant? What is required is the authorization of the owner of the monument, which in this case is the municipality. here you have the letter of the mayor (not "a random city employee"). Friniate (talk) 11:15, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- The agreement isn't a "law." So I'm not really sure what your talking about. Even if it was though that doesn't negate the fact that the images aren't licensed as Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer when they need to be to qualify for the agreement. Maybe you can at least answer me this though, what qualifies something as a "Cultural heritage monument" in Italy? Or is it essentially just whatever you put an image of in Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Italy is a cultural heritage monument "because category"? --Adamant1 (talk) 11:27, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- So, from your profound knowledge of italian legislation, also in the field of copyright, could you be so kind as to send an e-mail to the attention of the mayor and the councillor for culture and tourism explaining to them that they are violating a law? in the meantime, I'll order the popcorn...--Threecharlie (talk) 11:58, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1: Again, you don't know what you are talking about. Template:Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer is not a license and refers to a completely different problem. As explained in the very text of the template in Italy there is a regulation that makes it necessary to ask for authorisation in order to do certain used of photos of monuments that are out of copyright. This a non-copyright restrictions, so it's basically not a problem for Commons. The fact that the images you propose to delete do not have this template is completely irrelevant. The authorisation of the Ministry is not necessary for us to be able to publish photos of a monument that were authorised by a municipality in a written official document. --Jaqen (talk) 12:47, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1 what are you talking about? Did you read the page that I linked? I quote: In fact, it is the "owners" of a monument who have the right to authorize pictures of it. It's Codice Urbani itself which gives them these rights, indeed.. Sinnce 2012 the law (the Codice Urbani) has not changed AFAIK. Friniate (talk) 16:35, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- from your profound knowledge of italian legislation Again with the insults. Is that hard to reply to someone without insulting them? I'd really expect better from an administrator. Anyway, I'm done with the discussion. It's totally pointless if random people are just going to bigarade the discussion and act smug about it. It's not like I haven't already made my argument for why I think these images should be deleted. This discussion isn't about me and the closing the administrator is free to disregard what I said if I'm wrong. I could really care less, but at least from my reading of things these images don't qualify for the agreement and there's zero evidence that local municipalities can legally grant people the right to take images of "cultural heritage monuments" on an ongoing, indefinite basis. Especially not without said images being tagged with Template:Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer since it was part of the original agreement between Wiki Love Monuments and MiBAC, license or not. Nor is there any evidence that local municipalities own the copyrights to said monuments to begin with anyway. Again though, that's up to the closing administrator to decide and I'm not going to say anything else about it beyond that. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:46, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- As it is written in the page that I linked you, that template applies only for the monuments controlled by the Soprintendenza, that means the national authority. But I guess that is no use arguing if you have already decided that Italy must be deleted from commons because the entire Wikimedia Italia is wrong and doesn't know the law. Friniate (talk) 19:59, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- The last time I checked one DR isn't going to delete Italy from Commons and the agreement isn't a law to begin with. But it's clear people who want the images to be kept have no actual argument outside of acting needlessly overwrought and hyperbolic about it. So again, I'm done with the discussion. That doesn't mean my mind couldn't have been changed if someone had of provided with reasonable evidence. insults and hyperbole clearly don't cut it though. And I'd really expect more then that if the images could really be hosted on Commons. Anyway, like I said, I have nothing more to say about this and I'm not going to responding to anymore over-exaggerated, false claims about Italy being deleted from Commons or whatever if these images aren't kept. So I'd appreciate it if we just left it there. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 20:21, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- OMG, the agreement with the ministry is not involved here! What matters is the LAW, that requires an agreement with the owner of the monument (here a more detailed explanation of the issue, italian only), agreement that was linked above and that you have decided by your own that it's not valid. It is explained in the page linked before, then if you want to ignore the evidence against your POV, that's another issue. Friniate (talk) 21:32, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hey, your the one who originally told me to see Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 in Italy/MiBAC so if it doesn't matter, cool. You shouldn't have brought it up to begin with then. It's not my issue that you did though. And now your telling me I'm ignoring the evidence against my POV when I'm all doing is citing the page that YOU originally told me look at. Sure dude, whatever you say. I'm totally ignoring the evidence against my POV because I quoted something from a page YOU linked to and told me to read lmao. Can we be done with conversation now or do you have more links you want tell me to look at and then insult me for citing? --Adamant1 (talk) 04:25, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- I told you to read that page, something that clearly you are refusing to do for whatever reason, because there you could find an explanation of the issue in english, I never implied or anything that that agreement it's the law and other nonsense like that. And that's all, DNFTT. Friniate (talk) 06:30, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- I told you to read that page, something that clearly you are refusing to do Dude, I literally cited it multiple times. Although I don't see why it would matter if I read it or not since according to you it has nothing to do with this anyway lmao. But sure, whatever you say. the agreement has nothing to do with this but then I'm also supposedly at fault for not reading it. And I'm supposedly the one trolling. Yet your the one who's continuing to goad me into discussing something I've already said multiple times now I have nothing else to say about SMH. Like I've said multiple times now I'm perfectly fine leaving it up to the closing administrator. I'd appreciate it if you respected that instead of continuing to bait me into discussing this by responding with patently false, insulting comments. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:07, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- I told you to read that page, something that clearly you are refusing to do for whatever reason, because there you could find an explanation of the issue in english, I never implied or anything that that agreement it's the law and other nonsense like that. And that's all, DNFTT. Friniate (talk) 06:30, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hey, your the one who originally told me to see Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 in Italy/MiBAC so if it doesn't matter, cool. You shouldn't have brought it up to begin with then. It's not my issue that you did though. And now your telling me I'm ignoring the evidence against my POV when I'm all doing is citing the page that YOU originally told me look at. Sure dude, whatever you say. I'm totally ignoring the evidence against my POV because I quoted something from a page YOU linked to and told me to read lmao. Can we be done with conversation now or do you have more links you want tell me to look at and then insult me for citing? --Adamant1 (talk) 04:25, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- OMG, the agreement with the ministry is not involved here! What matters is the LAW, that requires an agreement with the owner of the monument (here a more detailed explanation of the issue, italian only), agreement that was linked above and that you have decided by your own that it's not valid. It is explained in the page linked before, then if you want to ignore the evidence against your POV, that's another issue. Friniate (talk) 21:32, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- The last time I checked one DR isn't going to delete Italy from Commons and the agreement isn't a law to begin with. But it's clear people who want the images to be kept have no actual argument outside of acting needlessly overwrought and hyperbolic about it. So again, I'm done with the discussion. That doesn't mean my mind couldn't have been changed if someone had of provided with reasonable evidence. insults and hyperbole clearly don't cut it though. And I'd really expect more then that if the images could really be hosted on Commons. Anyway, like I said, I have nothing more to say about this and I'm not going to responding to anymore over-exaggerated, false claims about Italy being deleted from Commons or whatever if these images aren't kept. So I'd appreciate it if we just left it there. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 20:21, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- As it is written in the page that I linked you, that template applies only for the monuments controlled by the Soprintendenza, that means the national authority. But I guess that is no use arguing if you have already decided that Italy must be deleted from commons because the entire Wikimedia Italia is wrong and doesn't know the law. Friniate (talk) 19:59, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- from your profound knowledge of italian legislation Again with the insults. Is that hard to reply to someone without insulting them? I'd really expect better from an administrator. Anyway, I'm done with the discussion. It's totally pointless if random people are just going to bigarade the discussion and act smug about it. It's not like I haven't already made my argument for why I think these images should be deleted. This discussion isn't about me and the closing the administrator is free to disregard what I said if I'm wrong. I could really care less, but at least from my reading of things these images don't qualify for the agreement and there's zero evidence that local municipalities can legally grant people the right to take images of "cultural heritage monuments" on an ongoing, indefinite basis. Especially not without said images being tagged with Template:Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer since it was part of the original agreement between Wiki Love Monuments and MiBAC, license or not. Nor is there any evidence that local municipalities own the copyrights to said monuments to begin with anyway. Again though, that's up to the closing administrator to decide and I'm not going to say anything else about it beyond that. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:46, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1 what are you talking about? Did you read the page that I linked? I quote: In fact, it is the "owners" of a monument who have the right to authorize pictures of it. It's Codice Urbani itself which gives them these rights, indeed.. Sinnce 2012 the law (the Codice Urbani) has not changed AFAIK. Friniate (talk) 16:35, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1: Again, you don't know what you are talking about. Template:Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer is not a license and refers to a completely different problem. As explained in the very text of the template in Italy there is a regulation that makes it necessary to ask for authorisation in order to do certain used of photos of monuments that are out of copyright. This a non-copyright restrictions, so it's basically not a problem for Commons. The fact that the images you propose to delete do not have this template is completely irrelevant. The authorisation of the Ministry is not necessary for us to be able to publish photos of a monument that were authorised by a municipality in a written official document. --Jaqen (talk) 12:47, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- So, from your profound knowledge of italian legislation, also in the field of copyright, could you be so kind as to send an e-mail to the attention of the mayor and the councillor for culture and tourism explaining to them that they are violating a law? in the meantime, I'll order the popcorn...--Threecharlie (talk) 11:58, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- The agreement isn't a "law." So I'm not really sure what your talking about. Even if it was though that doesn't negate the fact that the images aren't licensed as Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer when they need to be to qualify for the agreement. Maybe you can at least answer me this though, what qualifies something as a "Cultural heritage monument" in Italy? Or is it essentially just whatever you put an image of in Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Italy is a cultural heritage monument "because category"? --Adamant1 (talk) 11:27, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- It's the same initiative and the law has not changed, how on earth can you say that is not relevant? What is required is the authorization of the owner of the monument, which in this case is the municipality. here you have the letter of the mayor (not "a random city employee"). Friniate (talk) 11:15, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- These images were taken in 2017, 2022, and have nothing to do with either the event in 2012 or MiBAC. So I don't see how your link is relevant. Also again according to Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Italy and the page that you just linked to "As part of the agreement, we however have to add a disclaimer to the pictures: Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer" and none of these images are licensed with Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer. So your just making my argument for me as to why these images shouldn't be hosted on Commons since they have nothing to do with the original agreement and don't have the correct license, which is required, even if they did. You can't just claim an image taken in 2022 with the permission of a local mayor's office has anything to do with an agreement made in 2012 by the Italian Ministry of Cultural and Artistic Heritage though. That's not how it works. BTW, it doesn't even sound like the agreement is compatible with Commons to begin with, but that's another issue. Except to say images that can't be used for commercial purposes can't usually be hosted on Commons. I'm not going to press the issue though. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:55, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Please see Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 in Italy/MiBAC. By the way, there is no federal authority in Italy. Friniate (talk) 10:44, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- If this was licensed as Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer then it might be a different thing, but there's clearly a difference between Ministry of the Republic of Italy granting permission for certain photos of cultural heritage assets to be uploaded to Commons and employees of local municipalities giving random users said permission. More so because the uploader is claiming the image is their own work and they clear aren't an employee of the local government. Whatever you say though. I never claimed to know everything about this. Nor is my opinion the last or only word on it. I'm just going off what the document and guidelines say. So maybe skip the condescending tone next time. It's not really helpful. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:15, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete, WLM auth-related or not, this is a sculptural work. Therefore, also within the bounds of U.S. copyright law, in which the work will only fall PD in the U.S. 95+1 years after it was published or made public. I don't think the WLM authorization extends to the unrestricted exploitation of the artwork in the U.S.. See COM:URAA. U.S. copyright law can be ignored if Italy had complete, commercial FOP that is not dependent on loopholes of Italian government and judicial system. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:37, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- @JWilz12345: A license permission is not a loophole. --Jaqen (talk) 06:33, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Per article 11 of the Italian Copyright Law, municipalities hold the copyright on works made on their behalf. What was linked above seems a valid permission also as regards copyright. --Ferdi2005(talk) 08:22, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- I assume your referring to the fifth bullet point in Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Italy#General rules. If so, it says "copyright lasts for 20 years, or for 2 years for academies and other public cultural bodies, after which the rights revert to the author." So this would be copyrighted by the original creator regardless since the monument was created more then 20 years ago. Although the whole section makes it sound like the clause only applies to written published works, not monuments to begin with. So I don't think article 11 applies in this specific case given that the statue is more then 20 years old and isn't a written or published work that was created by an author. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:51, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1: Article 11 explicitly states "Copyright in works created and published under the name and at the expense of the State, the Provinces or the Communes shall belong to them.", thus it applies to every work. In addition, article 29, which defines the copyright duration for works covered by article 11, states "The duration of the copyright belonging, under art. 11, to the State, the provinces, the communes, the academies or public cultural organizations, or to private legal entities of a non-profit making character, shall be twenty years from first publication, whatever the form in which publication was effected. In the case of communications and memoranda published by academies and other public cultural organizations, the term shall be reduced to two years, after which the author shall wholly recover his right to the unrestricted disposal of his writings.". So, as the text of the law explicitly says, the rights revert back to the author (after 2 years) only in case of writings of academies and cultural organisations, while copyright expires after 20 years for other works made for public entities like municipalities. Ferdi2005(talk) 11:45, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know. From what you cited it sounds like the copyright reverts back to the author in 20 years regardless. Except in cases of communications and memoranda published by academies and other public cultural organizations, in which the term is two years. But nowhere does it say the term expires after 20 years. Really, it would be nonsensical if it did since the normal term for Italy is 70+ PMA after the authors death. So I don't see why the author of a written work would retain the copyright to their work after 2 years but creators of other types of works wouldn't. I think it reverting to the original creator after 20 is in line with what the guideline says to "This copyright lasts for 20 years, or for 2 years for academies and other public cultural bodies, after which the rights revert to the author." Nothing in the guideline says the copyright expires after 20 years. Maybe the wording in the guideline is wrong, but if so that's out of the scope of this discussion. Although I don't think it is since nothing in the law says the copyright expires after 20 years. At least not from what I've read of it or going by the parts of it that you cited. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:10, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1 Consider that Copyright Law was written in the 1940, so there's no point in judging it as nonsensical as they were very different times. I think that the law is very explicit in saying that copyright expires after 20 years ("La durata dei diritti esclusivi di utilizzazione economica spettanti, a termini dell'art. 11, alle amministrazioni dello stato, al partito nazionale fascista, alle provincie, ai comuni, alle accademie, agli enti pubblici culturali nonché agli enti privati che non perseguano scopi di lucro, è di vent'anni a partire dalla prima pubblicazione, qualunque sia la forma nella quale la pubblicazione è stata effettuata.", which is the same wording used to talk about the 70 years term "I diritti di utilizzazione economica dell'opera durano tutta la vita dell'autore e sino al termine del settantesimo anno solare dopo la sua morte."). In another sentence, separed by a clear dot, it then goes on to say that in case of writings and, pay attention, only writings "published by academies and other public cultural organizations", rights revert back to the author after two years (" Per le comunicazioni e le memorie pubblicate dalle accademie e dagli altri enti pubblici culturali tale durata è ridotta a due anni; trascorsi i quali, l'autore riprende integralmente la libera disponibilità dei suoi scritti." -> trascorsi i quali: "after those [the two years] lasted", with reference to the writings). I think that who wrote the guideline didn't give that passage the due consideration also because I think it isn't so common to argue about these specific provisions. Ferdi2005(talk) 16:06, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- I mean, I don't disagree that the guideline could be clearer. That's why I said someone who cares about this on your end should do a proposal to get the wording changed instead of just badgering individual users like we're the bad guys for following them. No one ever wants to do that though and so the images just end up getting deleted because for all the overwrought, vitriolic nonsense the same people who complain about these types of DRs won't put the actual work into making sure they don't happen again in the future, which is really my own concern. I don't like having to repeatedly re-litigate these types of things over and over any more then anyone else. That's just how it works when the agreement and guidelines aren't clear and no one wants to put the time into fixing either one though. It's fine that Italian Wikipedia users think everything is perfectly above board and that anyone who disagrees with is just trolling, but at the same time this isn't Wikipedia and we have our own way of doing things that can either be followed and respect or the images will be deleted. Everything else is just pointless, noisy bickering that will be ignored by the closing administrator. That said, I appreciate that you are at least able to articulate your position in a half reasonable and civil manor even if I disagree on some of the specifics. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- Comment A similar deletion request of a WLM item is here. As I suggested to A1Cafel who opened the other deletion request and undo my comment without answering: "why are you requesting separate deletions for this kind of files? Why don't you open a discussion on the Village pump instead? It should be more useful one general discussion, instead of forcing users to repeat the same reasons in each deletion request. Your deletion requests are also potentially confusing users who are participating in WLM with photos of authorized monuments". The result of this kind of deletion is negative, because new uploaders might lose confidence in WLM and in Wikimedia projects in general.--Pạtạfisik 14:13, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
- I mean, I don't disagree that the guideline could be clearer. That's why I said someone who cares about this on your end should do a proposal to get the wording changed instead of just badgering individual users like we're the bad guys for following them. No one ever wants to do that though and so the images just end up getting deleted because for all the overwrought, vitriolic nonsense the same people who complain about these types of DRs won't put the actual work into making sure they don't happen again in the future, which is really my own concern. I don't like having to repeatedly re-litigate these types of things over and over any more then anyone else. That's just how it works when the agreement and guidelines aren't clear and no one wants to put the time into fixing either one though. It's fine that Italian Wikipedia users think everything is perfectly above board and that anyone who disagrees with is just trolling, but at the same time this isn't Wikipedia and we have our own way of doing things that can either be followed and respect or the images will be deleted. Everything else is just pointless, noisy bickering that will be ignored by the closing administrator. That said, I appreciate that you are at least able to articulate your position in a half reasonable and civil manor even if I disagree on some of the specifics. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1 Consider that Copyright Law was written in the 1940, so there's no point in judging it as nonsensical as they were very different times. I think that the law is very explicit in saying that copyright expires after 20 years ("La durata dei diritti esclusivi di utilizzazione economica spettanti, a termini dell'art. 11, alle amministrazioni dello stato, al partito nazionale fascista, alle provincie, ai comuni, alle accademie, agli enti pubblici culturali nonché agli enti privati che non perseguano scopi di lucro, è di vent'anni a partire dalla prima pubblicazione, qualunque sia la forma nella quale la pubblicazione è stata effettuata.", which is the same wording used to talk about the 70 years term "I diritti di utilizzazione economica dell'opera durano tutta la vita dell'autore e sino al termine del settantesimo anno solare dopo la sua morte."). In another sentence, separed by a clear dot, it then goes on to say that in case of writings and, pay attention, only writings "published by academies and other public cultural organizations", rights revert back to the author after two years (" Per le comunicazioni e le memorie pubblicate dalle accademie e dagli altri enti pubblici culturali tale durata è ridotta a due anni; trascorsi i quali, l'autore riprende integralmente la libera disponibilità dei suoi scritti." -> trascorsi i quali: "after those [the two years] lasted", with reference to the writings). I think that who wrote the guideline didn't give that passage the due consideration also because I think it isn't so common to argue about these specific provisions. Ferdi2005(talk) 16:06, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know. From what you cited it sounds like the copyright reverts back to the author in 20 years regardless. Except in cases of communications and memoranda published by academies and other public cultural organizations, in which the term is two years. But nowhere does it say the term expires after 20 years. Really, it would be nonsensical if it did since the normal term for Italy is 70+ PMA after the authors death. So I don't see why the author of a written work would retain the copyright to their work after 2 years but creators of other types of works wouldn't. I think it reverting to the original creator after 20 is in line with what the guideline says to "This copyright lasts for 20 years, or for 2 years for academies and other public cultural bodies, after which the rights revert to the author." Nothing in the guideline says the copyright expires after 20 years. Maybe the wording in the guideline is wrong, but if so that's out of the scope of this discussion. Although I don't think it is since nothing in the law says the copyright expires after 20 years. At least not from what I've read of it or going by the parts of it that you cited. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:10, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Adamant1: Article 11 explicitly states "Copyright in works created and published under the name and at the expense of the State, the Provinces or the Communes shall belong to them.", thus it applies to every work. In addition, article 29, which defines the copyright duration for works covered by article 11, states "The duration of the copyright belonging, under art. 11, to the State, the provinces, the communes, the academies or public cultural organizations, or to private legal entities of a non-profit making character, shall be twenty years from first publication, whatever the form in which publication was effected. In the case of communications and memoranda published by academies and other public cultural organizations, the term shall be reduced to two years, after which the author shall wholly recover his right to the unrestricted disposal of his writings.". So, as the text of the law explicitly says, the rights revert back to the author (after 2 years) only in case of writings of academies and cultural organisations, while copyright expires after 20 years for other works made for public entities like municipalities. Ferdi2005(talk) 11:45, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- I assume your referring to the fifth bullet point in Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Italy#General rules. If so, it says "copyright lasts for 20 years, or for 2 years for academies and other public cultural bodies, after which the rights revert to the author." So this would be copyrighted by the original creator regardless since the monument was created more then 20 years ago. Although the whole section makes it sound like the clause only applies to written published works, not monuments to begin with. So I don't think article 11 applies in this specific case given that the statue is more then 20 years old and isn't a written or published work that was created by an author. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:51, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:27, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Les Horizons
[edit]The building was completed in 1970 by Georges Maillols (1913–1998). There is no freedom of panorama in France. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2069.
- File:DSC 0019 les horizons du coeur.jpg
- File:La tour " les horizons" a rennes - panoramio.jpg
- File:La tour « Les Horizons » de Rennes - Décembre 2020.jpg
- File:Les Horizons.JPG
- File:Rennes - Les Horizons (nuit).jpg
- File:Skeleton (Explored) - Flickr - Franck Michel.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_Flickr_-_Franck_Michel.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
A1Cafel (talk) 03:10, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:28, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
No permission from the source A1Cafel (talk) 03:20, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:28, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
The monument was completed in 1998 by Volodymyr Chepelyk (1945–2021), Nikolay Ivanovitsj Kisliy (1948–2010), Ruslan Ivanovich Kukharenko (1958–), and Юрій Мельничук. There is no freedom of panorama in Ukraine, permission from the architect and sculptor is required.
- File:Building of the Pedagogical Museum (Teachers' House) - panoramio.jpg
- File:Володимирська вул., 57!!.jpg
- File:Грушевський Михайло історик пам'ятник.jpg
- File:Грушевський пам'ятник Київ центр.jpg
- File:Грушевський пам'ятник центр.jpg
- File:Грушевський фото центр.jpg
- File:Київ Памятник Михайлові Грушевському 3.jpg
- File:Пам'ятник Грушевському (Київ).JPG
- File:Пам'ятник Грушевському по вулиці Володимирській, 57 у Києві.JPG
- File:Пам'ятник М. С. Грушевському IMG 6820.jpg
- File:Пам'ятник Михайлові Грушевському - panoramio.jpg
- File:Памятник Грушевскому в Киеве. Фото 2.jpg
- File:Перший президент України пам'ятник.jpg
- File:Сидячий пам'ятник Грушевського.jpg
_-_panoramio.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
A1Cafel (talk) 03:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:28, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
The uploader has a pattern of taking copyrighted photos, running them through artistic filters, and then uploading them as own work. Some of their uploads have already been deleted where the source photo was found. These all look to be the same type of deal, but the source photo hasn't been found yet. It feels safe to assume they are also copyvios though.
- File:Cristina Romera.jpg (from this photo)
- File:Clàudia Masdéu (2).jpg (from this photo)
- File:Clàudia Masdéu.jpg (from this photo)
- File:Cecilia Marin.png (from this photo)
- File:Maria Margarethe Winckelmann.png (from this photo)
- File:Roserroses3.png
- File:Roser Rosés, nena de Rússia.png
- File:Roser Rosés.png
- File:Sbarakat.png
- File:Xie Erhao.png (from this photo)
- File:Fatoumata Coulibaly.png (from this image)
- File:Ana Galvis.png (from this photo)
- File:Ana Galvis Hotz.png (from this photo)
- File:Buichi Terasawa.png (from this video)
- File:Lee Yong-soo.png
- File:Zhang Yang.png
- File:Zhangyang.png
- File:Lecomte2.png
- File:Lecomte.png
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:31, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello @The Squirrel Conspiracy:
- In most cases, the images I have uploaded are digital drawings that I have created using a tablet, or are illustrations made with markers and pencils that I have subsequently digitized. Although I used fragments of photographs as initial reference, these drawings go far beyond a simple filter application or modification. I firmly believe that they do not infringe copyright and that I can consider them original works in their entirety.
- It is important to note that my use of these images has a pedagogical and educational purpose. I have used them to illustrate articles where an image was not available under a free use license. My goal is to enrich the learning experience of the community and provide visual content in situations where information is crucial.
- Please let me know if there is any way to confirm the validity of these images and how I can help ensure their compliance with Wikimedia policies. I appreciate the opportunity to resolve any issues related to my contributions and am willing to make the necessary adjustments to comply with the platform's standards and policies.
- I appreciate your attention and guidance in this matter.
- Thank you. Alzinous (talk) 16:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Alzinous, you have used that argument a bunch of times, but that's not how it works. Derivative works of copyrighted things, including drawings from photos and filters over photos, are still copyrighted. Also, just because they serve a "pedagogical and educational purpose" does not guarantee that they should stay when they're copyrighted. Also, I personally don't believe that they "go far beyond a simple filter application or modification" since they literally look like filters. reppoptalk 22:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- I've added some sources that I could find next to the listed images. reppoptalk 22:26, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- I've speedy-deleted the ones you could find sources for. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:54, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Many identified as clear COM:DW CV; no reason offered why the not yet identified should be assumed to be more reliable. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:30, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
The uploader has a pattern of taking copyrighted photos, running them through artistic filters, and then uploading them as own work. Some of their uploads have already been deleted where the source photo was found. These all look to be the same type of deal, but the source photo hasn't been found yet. It feels safe to assume they are also copyvios though. I'm less confident about this batch than the previous batch, so I listed them separately
- File:Josep Salvador Puignau.jpg
- File:Jacint Barrera i Arenas.jpg (from this photo)
- File:Frederic Pujulà i Vallès.jpg (from this photo)
- File:Eulàlia Rosell.jpg (from this photo)
- File:Eulàlia Rosell i Capdevila.png (from this photo)
- File:Antoni Oriol i Anguera.jpg (from this photo)
- File:Retrat de Fernando Redondo.jpg
- File:Sara Borrell.jpg (from this photo)
The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hello @The Squirrel Conspiracy:
- In most cases, the images I have uploaded are digital drawings that I have created using a tablet, or are illustrations made with markers and pencils that I have subsequently digitized. Although I used fragments of photographs as initial reference, these drawings go far beyond a simple filter application or modification. I firmly believe that they do not infringe copyright and that I can consider them original works in their entirety.
- It is important to note that my use of these images has a pedagogical and educational purpose. I have used them to illustrate articles where an image was not available under a free use license. My goal is to enrich the learning experience of the community and provide visual content in situations where information is crucial.
- Please let me know if there is any way to confirm the validity of these images and how I can help ensure their compliance with Wikimedia policies. I appreciate the opportunity to resolve any issues related to my contributions and am willing to make the necessary adjustments to comply with the platform's standards and policies.
- I appreciate your attention and guidance in this matter.
- Thank you. Alzinous (talk) 16:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- In regards to these batch of photos, these seem to be from photos that may be in public domain, but if they are out of copyright, I would just question why they would be needed if the photos themselves could be uploaded instead of drawings from them. reppoptalk 22:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- @The Squirrel Conspiracy and Reppop: I would like to express my concern regarding the notices of possible copyright infringement that I have received. On several occasions I have responded to such notices, but it appears that my arguments are not valid. Unfortunately, however, I have rarely received a response from the team. Many times I have had the feeling that my images were being removed without any opportunity for reply or defence. I have also offered my cooperation in resolving any possible problems, however, my attempts have fallen on deaf ears. I am therefore surprised that the only response is the proposed blocking.
- For my part, I have chosen to refrain from uploading any more drawings for some time now and have no intention of resuming this practice. I hope that this message will be taken as a sincere gesture of good faith and that the blocking will not materialise. Alzinous (talk) 06:55, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- File:Josep Salvador Puignau.jpg it is a drawing made from https://www.cervantesvirtual.com/descargaPdf/josep-salvador-puignau-palafrugell-gerona-1908-toulouse1974-semblanza/
- File:Retrat de Fernando Redondo.jpg it is a drawing made from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Linera_Redondo_Rosenorn_1918.jpg
- Alzinous (talk) 07:15, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: images derivative of established PD sources; Deleted the others. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:34, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
File:Kijów - Pecherska Ławra i "Matka Ojczyzna" - Kiev - Pechersk Lavra and "Mather Home" - panoramio.jpg
[edit]
No FoP in Ukraine, the statue is prominent enough that fails de minimis A1Cafel (talk) 04:43, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete, we have other images that show the church without violating sculptor's posthumous copyright, like File:Kiev Kiev Pechersk Lavra IMG 6427 1725.jpg and File:Kiev Lavra Far Caves.JPG. This photo shows the statue in a substantial manner, having potential independent economic significance that will certainly harm the posthumous copyright held by sculptor's heirs or estate. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:42, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per A1Cafel and JWilz12345 Ox1997cow (talk) 17:50, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:34, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Saurabhsaha as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G10: Files and pages created as advertisements - Not an obvious G10 case, but is it in scope? The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:47, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused, dubious license claim. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:35, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
This footage is not public domain U.S. government material, but filmed for Tulsi Gabbard's presidential campaign. No copyright justification as a result. SuperWIKI (talk) 05:25, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:36, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Violation des copyrights, l’image provient de https://grandes-ecoles.studyrama.com/espace-prepas/concours/oraux/interview-de-carine-guibbani-membre-du-jury-a-l-oral-de-l-em-normandie-5781.html et le site mentionne dans ses mentions légales https://www.studyrama.com/studyrama/mentions-legales-4117 « En conséquence, toute reproduction de ceux-ci, totale ou partielle, ou imitation, sans notre accord exprès, préalable et écrit, est interdite. [...] Cette interdiction s’étend notamment, sans que cette liste ne soit limitative, à tout élément rédactionnel figurant sur le site, à la présentation des écrans, aux logiciels nécessaires à l’exploitation, aux logos, images, photos, graphiques, de quelque nature qu’ils soient.» Sayoxime (talk) 07:12, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:37, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
File:Hurricane Hilary floodings at Ciudad Constitución, Baja California Sur (August 18, 2023) (001).jpg
[edit]_(001).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(001).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No permission from the source A1Cafel (talk) 09:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:37, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
File:Hurricane Hilary floodings at Ciudad Constitución, Baja California Sur (August 18, 2023) (002).jpg
[edit]_(002).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(002).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No permission from the source A1Cafel (talk) 09:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:37, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Sculpture of Rene Lavand installed in his hometown Tandil. There is no COM:FOP in Argentina and it was certainly installed in the last 10-30 years as Lavand died in 2015. Günther Frager (talk) 11:25, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:38, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Sculpture by Nicaraguan artist Erasmo Moya (1952-2020) and installed in Buenos Aires. There is no freedom of panorama for sculptures in Argentina. We can undele this file in 2091. Günther Frager (talk) 12:31, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- I kindly request that, as a reliable source of authorship of this sculpture, you provide the corresponding data from its deposit in the Intellectual Property Registry, in a sketch or photograph of the original, with additional indications that allow it to be identified. Thank you. --Gabriel Sozzi (talk) 21:58, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- The Buenos Aires government maintains a database with all the monuments in the city. You can find it here: https://data.buenosaires.gob.ar/dataset/monumentos. The relevant entry is
Günther Frager (talk) 00:08, 17 September 2023 (UTC)ID;OBJETO_OBRA;CANTIDAD_OBJETOS;MATERIAL;DENOMINACION_SIMBOLIZA;AUTORES;UBICACION;OBSERVACIONES;DIRECCION_NORMALIZADA;CALLE;ALTURA;BARRIO;COMUNA;CODIGA_POSTAL;CODIGO_POSTAL_ARGENTINO;LATITUD;LONGITUD
---
1976;BUSTO;1;PIEDRA LIMAY;RUBEN DARIO;MOYA, ERASMO;DEL LIBARTADOR AV 3101;DEL LIBARTADOR AV 3101;DEL LIBERTADOR AV. 3101;DEL LIBERTADOR AV.;3101;PALERMO;COMUNA 14;1425;C1425ABE;-34.57642343306996;-58.41177107651361
- Thank you very much for your reply. I was unaware of this authorship, and I fully agree with the deletion of the photograph from Commons. --Gabriel Sozzi (talk) 21:50, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination & discussion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:38, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Postcards from Montechiaro
[edit]
Continigio originally uploaded two files and claimed they were old postcards, then overwrite them, without changing the claim. The new photos do not seem to be taken in 1950 and 1970, and even if they were they could still be copyvio. They are quite certainly not cc-by-sa, and the very low resolution is also suspect.--Jaqen (talk) 13:09, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:39, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Copied onto Wikisource from the internet: no proof provided that the uploader is the author and presumption must be that they are different people. Separate issue, but no information provided about the underlying artwork or its copyright status (even whether it's genuinely ancient), and no other source semes to know it as Atticus: it certainly looks to my eye a lot like a portrait of Caesar. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 13:29, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- I certainly don't object to rationale or outcome, but I'm confused about "Copied onto Wikisource"? That is a text repository. Elizium23 (talk) 14:35, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: No evidence of claimed free license at source. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:40, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Derivative work (screenshot), not own work. 2003:C0:8F07:7000:3D3A:6420:DD0E:5467 13:35, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:41, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Oscar Antonio (talk · contribs)
[edit]The images are either album covers, film covers, or advertisements / derivative works of them. The excuse to place it in the PD is either published in Argentine or applying some "AI algorithm to them". The first is wrong, copyright is determined by the first publication. For example, it is unthinkable that the Albums from Roxette were fist published in Argentina. Even one of the album covers is in Japanese, a language not spoken in Argentina. Regarding the second argument, AI can produce copyright violation specially if the input is a copyrighted work.
- File:Directo al corazon.png
- File:Los amos del universo.png
- File:La marca del Zorro.png
- File:Missing you - an album of love.png
- File:Alta Tensión.png
- File:Club de los monstruos.png
- File:DRACULA 1974.png
- File:Dressed for success.png
- File:Runaway sencillo.png
- File:Mi viejo sencillo de 1969.png
- File:Magneto - Vuela Vuela.png
- File:Juan Ramon.png
- File:Océano. Portada del album de 1989.png
- File:Marie Fredriksson.png
- File:Flyer conceptual de That's What I Like.png
- File:That's What I Like.png
- File:Daniela Mori.png
- File:Doc. Hollywood.png
- File:Flyer basado en la portada de Loco Vox.png
- File:Paz Martinez.png
- File:PGROXETTE - 1.png
- File:Joyride (Album).png
- File:Crash 8 de abril.png
File:Joseph Quinn Bretz.png- File:Es o no es.png
- File:Joyride sencillo.png
- File:Trampa para un soñador.png
- File:Donald Clifton McCluskey cantante argentino.png
- File:Roxette it must have been love.png
- File:Tormenta.png
- File:Fernando de Madariaga.png
- File:RECREACIÓN IA SWEDEN LIVE.png
- File:Per Gessle.png
- File:The Look Sencillo.png
- File:Historia del crimen.png
- File:Vanessa Colaiutta.png
- File:Ricardo montaner 2.png
- File:Irresistible.png
- File:Gente detrás de las paredes (1).png
- File:Tourismroxette.png
- File:Luismi album un sol.png
- File:RSM Locomia.png
- File:Pablo Ruiz Un angel.png
- File:1987. Pablo Ruiz1.png
- File:Kobra kai.png
- File:Graciela Saez.png
- File:Flyer con IA conceptual a partir del disco Un Ángel.png
- File:Vanessa Colaiutta - Disco homónimo del año 2005.png
- File:Vanessa Colaiutta - Cantautora argentina radicada en México.png
- File:Bag of Trix - Boxset del duo Roxette.png
- File:1987. Pablo Ruiz.png
- File:1990. Espejos Azules.png
- File:Portada Album "Pablo Ruiz".jpg
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Günther Frager (talk) 13:39, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Günther Frager
- hi. thank you for your comments
- the mass deletion request suggests there is some animosity. The file named "Joseph Quinn Bretz.png" has not been published with the aforementioned tag, since it has the authorization of the author (reading the file in the summary part is enough to understand it)
- For the rest of the observations, I will use the discussion tool for each file.
- greetings Oscar Antonio (talk) 15:27, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- I removed File:Joseph Quinn Bretz.png from the list as it has a VTS ticket. Günther Frager (talk) 15:38, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Günther Frager
- I expand on my initial commen:
- The publication used (with or without AI edition) was registered, printed and/or published in Argentina according to the terms of law 11723 article 31 and its modifications and article 4 paragraph 7 of the Berne Convention.
- It is valid for compilations of data or other materials; dramatic works, musical compositions, dramatic-musical according to article 1 of that same law.
- According to this same law, the publication of the portrait is free (and by extension according to precedents of rulings) when it is related to scientific, didactic and in general purposes.
- general cultural, or with facts or events of public interest or that had taken place in public.
- Article 13 of the same law establishes that all the provisions of this Law, except those of article 57, are equally applicable to scientific, artistic and literary works, published in foreign countries, regardless of the nationality of their authors, provided that belong to nations that recognize intellectual property rights.
- For all of the above, it is requested that the files that are published in Argentina, older than 20 years, be maintained, and that they are validated as required by Wikipedia through the digital link. Oscar Antonio (talk) 15:39, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- COM:Licensing requires the files to have a free license or be in the public domain in both the country of origin and the United States. You are giving an argument for Argentina, not for the United States. Besides, most of the files are derivatives of works not published originally in Argentina. For example, File:Roxette it must have been love.png contains the cover art of the a maxi single released in the USA in 1990; File:Directo al corazon.png contains the cover of an album published originally in Mexico where copyright is 100 years pma.; File:Los amos del universo.png is the poster (with Spanish titles) of Master of the Universe, published originally in the United States in 1987; File:Vanessa Colaiutta - Disco homónimo del año 2005.png contains the cover of an album published in 2005 in Mexico; etc. Looking at your discussion page many of these images were deleted and recreated several times.Günther Frager (talk) 16:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Regarding the image called "The Mark of Zorro.png" it "imitates" various covers of various films. A moon was digitally recreated. A colored background is applied with filters and the silhouette variant was used with Photoshop to recreate a silhouette of the hero on horseback. Do I really look at file by file?) Oscar Antonio (talk) 15:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Delete Per the nominator. Most of the images are clearly COPYVIO and the few that aren't should be deleted regardless since I don't think the whole "AI produced images are PD" thing holds up in cases where they are based on otherwise copyrighted works. Otherwise people could just neural filters in Photoshop to lighten an otherwise copyrighted photograph and say it's PD "because AI", which clearly isn't in line with the law. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:47, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: (with one exception) per nomination and discussion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:43, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by LosPajaros
[edit]- File:Wesley Hunt on his Conservative upbringing.ogg
- File:Harriet Hageman speaks on being a Wyomingite.ogg
- File:Jasmine Crockett on how her past Law experience prepared her for Congress.ogg
- File:Derrick Van Orden on what it's like to be a Navy SEAL.ogg
- File:Laurel Lee on her past work experience and their relationship to her job as Representative.ogg
- File:Becca Balint on her Political Role Models.ogg
- File:Eric Sorenson on how his career as a Meteorologist prepared him for Congress-.ogg
- File:Josh Brecheen on his conservative principles.ogg
- File:Jeff Jackson speaks on his political philosophy.ogg
- File:Morgan McGarvey speaks on his children and political office.ogg
- File:Greg Landsman on his devotion to his faith and its relation to public service.ogg
- File:Glenn Ivey on his priorities in Congress.ogg
- File:Monica De La Cruz on her Conservative roots.ogg
- File:Ross Perot speaks on American Competitiveness and the protection of American Jobs.ogg
- File:Dick Cheney on his immediate reaction following the September 11 Attacks.ogg
- File:Dan Quayle answers questions on his fitness to serve as Vice President at the 1992 Vice Presidential Debate.ogg
- File:Al Gore answers questions on the origin of U.S. strength at the second 2000 Presidential Debate.ogg
- File:Condoleezza Rice on the 1963 Birmingham Church Bombing.ogg
- File:Jon Stewart speaks at a Press Conference in support of the PACT Act.ogg
- File:Greg Casar on his interest in U.S. Labor and Activism.ogg
Unless otherwise stated, the only public-domain footage on C-SPAN is of activity in the House and Senate chambers. The files here are interviews conducted entirely under the auspices of C-SPAN or private-commercial campaigns and debates only recorded by C-SPAN. Hence, these are not U.S. government material and not in the public domain, and not subject to any copyright exceptions due to their recency. They are also not subject to any PD-US-no-notice copyright templates due to being published after 1989. See File:Nikki Budzinski speaks on her past labor experience.ogg for a related example. SuperWIKI (talk) 12:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Not public domain works. William Graham (talk) 18:07, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:44, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Photo of a copyrighted map on the seatback screen of an airline flight. Sunnya343 (talk) 14:15, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:DW. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:45, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Empty file مغوار (talk) 14:17, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:45, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Aarnous8817 (talk · contribs)
[edit]These two images look like a student supplementing a Wikiversity article at https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Cjcampo/ENES_100/Turbine with a couple of images found online. Tineye dates the cellophane image to 2010 and the roll of tape appears higher res without the right side cropped, on other sites (https://media.screwfix.com/is/image/ae235/40728_P)
Belbury (talk) 14:42, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:46, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
copyright violation, see source Xocolatl (talk) 14:43, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi, i updated the source, i had put the wrong one by mistake. Mito0504 (talk) 16:00, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: Correctly free licensed per source. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:47, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
doesn't look like a selfie - copyright? Xocolatl (talk) 14:47, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: unused, OOS self promotion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
copyright violation? see metadata Xocolatl (talk) 14:49, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:47, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
copyright violation? see metadata Xocolatl (talk) 14:50, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:49, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation? This picture has been bouncing around the we for many years. The BBC used it in 2014 and credited Thinkstock (now part of iStock). Very unlikely that it is the Uploader own work as claimed. Headlock0225 (talk) 14:54, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, certainly not a 2023 photo by uploader. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:49, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
"Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba" Promotional Video Solomon203 (talk) 14:59, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:DW. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
screenshot of movie Ma (2019) with Dante Brown ZimskoSonce (talk) 15:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:49, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope: Excluded educational content. Raw text. Better hosted elsewhere. Headlock0225 (talk) 15:15, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. In addition to the scope concerns, it appears that permission would be needed from Stanford University Press (the reported source of the text). Marbletan (talk) 18:33, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
non free - scan of book ZimskoSonce (talk) 15:42, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:50, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Non free work, copyrighted. (https://www.stadkoltugu.com/projeler/yeni-elazig-ataturk-stadyumu) MarinaMann (talk) 15:35, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- zaten kaynak göstererek görsel paylaşılmış? Herhangi bir sorun yok ki. Esenlikler Harunstalay023 (talk) 15:38, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
non free ZimskoSonce (talk) 15:43, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
non free ZimskoSonce (talk) 15:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
non free ZimskoSonce (talk) 15:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
non free ZimskoSonce (talk) 15:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
non free ZimskoSonce (talk) 15:44, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
© Guinness World Records Limited 2023. All rights reserved. ZimskoSonce (talk) 16:36, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Artist died in 2014 and there is no permission on the file. Daehan (talk) 16:39, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Artist died in 2014 and there is no permission on the file. Daehan (talk) 16:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Artist died in 2014 and there is no permission on the file. Daehan (talk) 16:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Artist died in 2014 and there is no permission on the file. Daehan (talk) 16:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
This photo is not in public domain and it wasn't uploaded by Stane Jerko ZimskoSonce (talk) 16:47, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:54, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Logo New York City FC.png (this file was uploaded on 26 October 2014) SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 16:50, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Yes, and smaller, of the same file type. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:54, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:54, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Historical photo, likely to be a derivative work, thus a proper source and license is needed A1Cafel (talk) 16:56, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, certainly was not photographed years after Sihanouk died. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:55, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
screenshots of images from internet (source of image on left: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Picture-of-the-120-Millenium-multileaf-collimator-from-Varian-The-rounded-leaf-ends_fig3_30002004 and ) ZimskoSonce (talk) 17:00, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:55, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
possible copyvio (c) oliver reetz M2k~dewiki (talk) 17:11, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:56, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
I saw on this video, that it just shows the flag for the village Hoek van Holland, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands, i saw on that video that the boat steering wheel it more looks like its from File:Flag of Hoek van Holland.svg, Theres no reason to look the boat steering wheel like that. Alexphangia Talk 17:24, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Agree with the deletion request. I mistook the flag of the village of Hoek van Holland for the house flag of Hoeksveer. GERMENFER 11:10, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:56, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
_in_1967.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_in_1967.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Uploader claims the author of the 1967 photo is {{Anonymous}} and the uploader added the {{PD-Bolivia}} template. One of 3 conditions needs to be met before that template can be used. Since he author is claimed to be anonymous and there is no indication given that the photo is a collective work, the most logic choice would be that this photo is supposed to be anonymously published before 1973. The uploader sofar didn't explain when it was published. Robotje (talk) 17:32, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
_in_1967.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete This was not public domain in Bolivia on January 1, 1996 as the soonest this would have become public domain was 2018. Abzeronow (talk) 21:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
1967+25+1=1993! The URAA restoration deadline for Bolivia is 1 January 1996. --RAN (talk) 22:32, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): Why do you use 25 years in this calculation? The copyright term in Bolivia is 50 years, not 25, and I don't see anything that says that it was shorter at some point. --Rosenzweig τ 11:49, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
- You are correct! Bolivia is 50 years! --RAN (talk) 15:03, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination & discussion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:56, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
_in_1967.jpg){kind=link}
Image provenant d’Instagram. Ces images ne sont pas sous licence libre, selon leurs conditions. Kirham (talk) 18:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Elle devrait être supprimée car je n'en ai aucun droit sur cette image et je n'ai eu aucune autorisation pour pouvoir la publier sur d'autres sites, donc pour éviter d'être poursuivi en justice par l'auteur, je voudrais la supprimer. Carlosbfta (talk) 13:12, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:57, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
The main focus is the cover of three comic books covers. Günther Frager (talk) 18:09, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- So it's a stand of this exhibition Lafloche (talk) 07:57, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination COM:DW. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:57, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Image is text without any educational purpose. Günther Frager (talk) 18:21, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. This looks like it was meant to go with File:Temporal Lobe Infographics by Makayla Brown.svg, which I've just marked as an unsourced derivative work due to embedded clip art. Omphalographer (talk) 20:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:58, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Image taken from https://www.gartner-a.com/sportna-dvorana-menges (©2010-2022 gartner-a.com | vse pravice pridržane) ZimskoSonce (talk) 18:33, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:58, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
User AleksanderAntic didn't write original source and author of image. It's obvious this photo wasn't shot by him. ZimskoSonce (talk) 18:41, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:58, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
No proof of free license HeminKurdistan (talk) 18:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, lacking information needed to establish source/license. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:59, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
meme with unknown origin, taken from internet, plus racist description (average Albanian is "ugly and hairy") ZimskoSonce (talk) 18:54, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No permission from author Shevchenko Igor Konstantin. Sourse VenzKor (talk) 19:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
file appears to be damaged ZimskoSonce (talk) 19:38, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, unused, uncat, useless. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:02, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Identical image appears at https://mathshistory.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Dowker/pictdisplay/ with the copyright statement We do not own the copyright to the images used on this website, however we believe that most of them are in the public domain and that provided you use them on a website you are unlikely to encounter any difficulty. However, if you wish to use them in any other way - in "paper" publishing or on a CD for example - we cannot guarantee that there may not be outstanding copyright problems. We have not kept a record of where we found any of the images we have used. Photograph is undated with no photographer credited. Belbury (talk) 19:52, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep I agree, PD-Canada is the correct license. --RAN (talk) 22:53, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion, license corrected. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:02, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Looks like an obvious copyright violation. It's an image from a game that isn't freely licensed. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 19:57, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:03, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
cropped? https://www.deviantart.com/chizuruinanna/art/Chizuru-Nakagawa-926771000 eien20 (talk) 20:08, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:CV. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:05, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Copyrighted site says it was taken in 2020 [3] Retired electrician (talk) 21:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- sorry, false positive - it's ultimately from CC-Attr-4.0 site [4]. Retired electrician (talk) 21:08, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Lead.vision (talk · contribs)
[edit]COM:NOTHOST/promotional files out of com:scope.
- File:Roundtable discussion held at NSU.jpg
- File:Primeasia University signed MoU with Leadership Excellence And Development (LEAD).jpg
- File:NSU arranges orientation programme for new faculty members.png
- File:Monash University Training Session (Australia).jpg
- File:LEAD IL Logo Original.png
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Jonteemil (talk) 21:42, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete all per nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:45, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:06, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
The tower might push it above COM:TOO Argentina. Jonteemil (talk) 21:57, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep I'm guessing that typical stylized tower is not a "personal imprint," and if I'm right, the rest of the shapes are likely too simple to be. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:41, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Kept: per Ikan Kekek, false license claim removed. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:07, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Might be above COM:TOO Andean Community which is a bit hard to interpret. Jonteemil (talk) 22:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, uncertain TOO, not free licensed at source. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Hoaxes and copyvios. Also see user talk page.
- File:Škoda 22Ab Prototyp.png (https://imhd.sk/ba/galeria-media/82104/%C5%A0koda-22-Ab)
- File:Chrudimka ve Slatiňanech.png (https://mapy.cz/zakladni?pano=1&pid=87410102&newest=1&yaw=2.919&fov=1.257&pitch=0.199&x=15.8118754&y=49.9211887&z=19 - go 4 steps to the left)
- File:Moštěnka river 2.png (=File:Olomouc (268).jpg)
- File:Moštěnka River.png (https://mapy.cz/turisticka?pano=1&q=49.317556N%2C%2017.385639E&source=coor&id=17.385639%2C49.317556&pid=60587062&newest=0&yaw=1.791&fov=1.257&pitch=0.365&x=17.4304874&y=49.3738893&ds=1&z=16)
- File:River Torysa.png
- File:Basin Sytava.png (hoax)
- File:River Basin Chýnovka.png (hoax)
- File:Úslava - Božkovský Jez, Plzeň.png
- File:Řeka Ostravice z mostu Miloše Sýkory.png (https://mapy.cz/zakladni?pano=1&pid=90965797&newest=1&yaw=5.832&fov=0.758&pitch=0.080&x=18.2963959&y=49.8375065&z=19)
- File:Větší Vltavice.png
- File:Bridge on Chotovinský-Kozský potok.png
- File:Povodí-Úhlavky.png (hoax)
- File:Čekanický potok Basin.png (hoax)
- File:Cidlina u Olešnice.png
- File:Vsetínská bečva.png
- File:Bělá Pelhřimov.png (https://mapy.cz/turisticka?pano=1&pid=84466225&newest=1&yaw=6.100&fov=1.571&pitch=0.164&x=15.2264012&y=49.4362165&z=19)
- File:Barbus Petenyi.png (http://www.rybarizatec.cz/obsah/parma-vychodni-stredomorska/)
- File:Beste Straße.png (hoax)
- File:Údolí Čekanického potoka v Čekanicích.png
- File:Milevský potok.png
- File:Turovecký potok.png
- File:Carassius carassius (crucian carp).jpg (https://www.mrk.cz/r/atlasy/atlas_ryb/maloostni/kaproviti/karas_obecny/ - archived in 2007 already: https://web.archive.org/web/20070328191727/https://www.mrk.cz/r/atlasy/atlas_ryb/maloostni/kaproviti/karas_obecny/)
- File:MapofPloticepolabska.png (hoax)
- File:Mapa výskytu Placky roudnické.png (hoax)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Remaining PNG photos (low resolution, no metadata) are most probably copyvios too from Mapy.cz like others or from the Google Street View.
Harold (talk) 22:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope / potential copyvio: plain text content and unsourced clip art. Omphalographer (talk) 22:06, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. In addition to the scope issue, the file contains images of unknown source for which we would need evidence of permission from the copyright holders. Marbletan (talk) 18:35, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope. A version of Club Ferrocarril Midland emblem with watermarks that is not used by the club. (see Club's official Facebook). Beyond that, the logo is above the TOO. - Fma12 (talk) 11:48, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Kept: in use. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 01:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Possibly above COM:TOO Argentina which is a bit hard to interpret. Previous DR closure didn't say anything about possible copyvio, only out of scope issue. Jonteemil (talk) 22:15, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, TOO uncertain, license claim dubious. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Vandalism, erroneous depiction of the Liberland flag Anonimski (talk) 22:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, OOS. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:10, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Copyright violation, unlikely to be own work as claimed, user uploaded no other dermatological photos and webpage archives (note some images at the linked webpage involve nudity) show the image has been around since at least late 2010, about 2 years before it was uploaded to Commons. The linked webpage notes no author credit nor has any indication that the image is available under a free license. —The Editor's Apprentice (Talk) 22:54, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Vandalism, doesn't seem to represent anything real or notable or of any notability Anonimski (talk) 22:55, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Low quality photograph, no foreseeable educational use. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 23:12, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Agreed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:34, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
No source. Author can't be identified. Professional head shot unlikely to be CC0. William Graham (talk) 23:18, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:12, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Hyolee2 as Speedy (speedydeletion). As was explained previously, this does not qualify for COM:CSD#G7. Please provide a reason for deletion or courtesy deletion. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:45, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Good photo, could be useful, so should be kept unless the uploader has a compelling reason for us to do a courtesy deletion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:30, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per uploader request - a bit more than a week but granting courtesy deletion leeway. Unused. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:14, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Mikani as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: La chaine est sous copyright. mikani (to talk) 14:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Benoît Prieur. --Rosenzweig τ 12:58, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
screenshot - © 2018 - 2023 IZUM – Institut informacijskih znanosti, Maribor ZimskoSonce (talk) 20:33, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Infrogmation. --Rosenzweig τ 12:58, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in France A1Cafel (talk) 03:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- How stupid for a picture from 2008, 15 years ago ! This is sand on a beach, destroyed since maybe some minutes by the sea after the photograph. Please delete if accurate , le ridicule ne tue pas. Jebulon (talk) 19:35, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- And by the say, what about the category:Sand sculptures in France ? Jebulon (talk) 11:50, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Although I agree this is a little pedantic, Temporary artwork can still hold copyright. It's not like all sand sculptures are instantly washed away the second they are created anyway though. For instance there's a few near where I live that have been there for years. Although admittedly they are covered into the side of a sandy embankment, but whatever. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:47, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
-not pedantic, just stupid. i hope professional deleters are happy now.--Jebulon (talk) 12:25, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 18:50, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 50 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in Laos.
- File:Kaysone Phomvihane Memorial, Vientiane, Laos (4244195959).jpg
- File:Kaysone Phomvihane Memorial, Vientiane, Laos (4244960164).jpg
- File:Kaysone Phomvihane Memorial, Vientiane, Laos (4244980104).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
A1Cafel (talk) 04:30, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 18:51, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Fito Páez album covers
[edit]Album covers published during the 1980s. The images might be PD in Argentina (photos have protection for 25 years), but they were protected in 1996 at URAA time. Thus, all these images are still copyrighted in the USA. Following COM:PCP we should delete these images.
- File:Fito Paez Ciudad De Pobres Corazones.jpg
- File:Fito paez ey cover.jpg
- File:Fito paez grandesexitos cover.jpg
- File:Fitopaez corazonclandestino.jpg
- File:Fitopaez del63.jpg
- File:Spinetta paez lalala.jpg
Günther Frager (talk) 08:53, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 18:53, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
Not HD quality, no exif, "own work" unlikely in my opinion, especially since User:Duke of Maragoli uploaded another copyvio picture of this person (see talk page). Titlutin (talk) 19:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:53, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Tomipelegrin (talk · contribs)
[edit]Old photos of Alan Turing, no sources given and the uploader simply claiming to have taken them all personally, ninety years ago. Public domain status would depend on who took them and at what point they were released to the public - {{PD-UK-unknown}} requires them to have been published before 1953, which would need some confirmation. The 1913 photo is still ten years away from being {{PD-old-assumed}}.
Belbury (talk) 20:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- No source, false authorship claim, delete --Polarlys (talk) 20:48, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Anonymous works in the UK are 70 years from creation. The 1913 image was most likely taken by Julius Mathison Turing (1873-1947), some of the others may have been taken by him also, I added: "author=most likely Julius Mathison Turing (1873-1947)" for the 1913. The terms of "PD-UK-unknown" are "A photograph, which has never previously been made available to the public (e.g. by publication or display at an exhibition) and which was taken more than 70 years ago". So, whether taken by his father, or anonymous, are PD-UK-unknown. --RAN (talk) 23:03, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- 70 years from creation is for images which have "never previously been made available to the public". I'm dismissing out of hand the idea that Tomipelegrin is unveiling these family photos for the first time; the same images can be found on many other websites. Don't we need to know the date at which these initially private family photos were first published in a biography or newspaper, if they're anonymous? If that publication date is after 1953, they won't fall under the second bullet point's "made available to the public (e.g. by publication or display at an exhibition) more than 70 years ago" yet.
- Any that were taken by Turing's father who died in 1947 fall under {{PD-old-70}}, but we'd need some confirmation of that. --Belbury (talk) 06:44, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Old photos do not come with exif data naming the camera owner, the date, and the location, we have to use contextual clues and Occam's Razor. Every old image is estimated unless the image is of an historical event that can be exactly dated. When we see an image of a family with one member missing Occam's Razor would say that the missing person is most likely the photographer. --RAN (talk) 14:22, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Does Commons really go as far as saying that if something is very likely to be public domain with a small possibility the photographer could have been another person who would still retain copyright, it's hereby declared to be 100% public domain and the world can reuse it as such? I'm surprised, but fair enough.
- What of the other three photos, though, do we not need to know when they were first "made available to the public"? --Belbury (talk) 15:32, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Old photos do not come with exif data naming the camera owner, the date, and the location, we have to use contextual clues and Occam's Razor. Every old image is estimated unless the image is of an historical event that can be exactly dated. When we see an image of a family with one member missing Occam's Razor would say that the missing person is most likely the photographer. --RAN (talk) 14:22, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- With historical images of this kind, we often end up with the same point: we make assumptions about copyright status without consulting the best available source. In the case of Alan Turing as a particularly notable individual, we must assume that all such recordings have already been published and that they are attributed as best as possible to an estate and an author in biographical works or databases. Providing such an indication of provenance is the gold standard and it is up to the uploader to provide it. Such an indication goes hand in hand not only with a reliable provenance, but also the best possible information on author, date and place of creation, persons depicted, etc., and also the highest possible file quality. We should not be satisfied with using an inferior web source and an assumption of copyright status for files of this kind, which are widely reused. --Polarlys (talk) 08:06, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:54, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
copyvio https://www.service-public.fr/professionnels-entreprises/vosdroits/F31704 Fourmidable (talk) 20:11, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:54, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Amirali8793 (talk · contribs)
[edit]The stated licenses are probably bogus. COM:TOO Iran is supposedly very low so these are most likely above it.
- File:Esteghlal Tehran.png
- File:Esteghlal Tehran FC.png
- File:Esteghlal Tehran FC logo.png
- File:لوگوی غیر رسمی باشگاه فوتبال استقلال تهران.png
Jonteemil (talk) 20:17, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:54, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
unused file related to non-notable award, Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 20:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- I'll grant you that en.wikipedia does not cover this award, but I'd still tend to Keep the file in case someone decides to use it, either on or off Wikimedia. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:49, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:55, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Diablo_del_Oeste (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely authorship claims. Low-resolution photos without EXIF data, uploaded by a user with a long record of uploading copyright violations.
- File:FABY2.JPG
- File:ROLFY.JPG
- File:FABY.JPG
- File:CARLITOS2.JPG
- File:RENGO.JPG
- File:PUSY.JPG
- File:TANKE2.JPG
—LX (talk, contribs) 15:13, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Just to be safe. As uploaded by an user who has history of uploading copyvios, and also currently blocke. — [ Tanvir | Talk ] 06:01, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Diablo del Oeste (talk · contribs)
[edit]These images were all first published in Argentina after 1976 (earliest are from 1977) and before 1996, and are all public domain in Argentina; Argentina's copyright term for photographs is 20 years after publication. However, because the URAA applies to Argentinian works beginning on 1 January 1996, all of the images are still copyrighted in the US, due to still being copyrighted in Argentina in 1996, and so cannot be kept at Commons without an alternative license.
Diablo del Oeste uploaded a few other images in the same period that these images were uploaded. They are CC-licensed and tagged as self-made, and Google's reverse image search did not find any earlier copies.
- File:SpinettaPresidente1984.jpg
- File:PuglieseFito.jpg
- File:Laopinion23.png
- File:GritoLeda.jpg
- File:GritoEnElCielo.jpg
- File:AznarValladaresPaezCerati.jpg
- File:MichelRiff.png
- File:BoffRiff.png
- File:ViticoRiff.png
- File:MoroSG.png
- File:Serugiran1981.jpg
- File:RusoLebon.png
- File:Laopinion08.png
- File:Laopinion22.png
- File:Laopinion21.png
- File:Laopinion20.png
- File:Laopinion19.png
- File:Laopinion18.png
- File:Laopinion17.png
- File:Laopinion16.png
- File:Laopinion15.png
- File:Laopinion14.png
- File:Laopinion13.png
- File:Laopinion12.png
- File:Laopinion11.png
- File:Laopinion09.png
- File:Laopinion07.jpg
- File:Laopinion10.png
- File:Laopinion05.jpg
- File:Laopinion06.jpg
- File:Laopinion04.jpg
- File:Laopinion01.jpg
- File:Laopinion03.jpg
- File:Laopinion02.jpg
- File:Punch-1980.jpg
- File:Punch-ADQQV.jpg
- File:LosTwist.jpg
- File:RedondosEnVivo.jpg
- File:CeratiAlbertiBosio.jpg
- File:PaseBochinesco.jpg
- File:IndependienteTalleres1977.jpg
- File:Bochini1986.png
- File:Bochini1988.jpg
- File:RiffContenidos.jpg
- File:Riff1983.png
- File:SGarre.jpg
- File:SilvinaGarre.jpg
- File:JCBaglietto.png
- File:ActuarParaVivir ContraTapa.jpg
- File:TrovaRosarina.jpg
Jc86035 (talk) 17:40, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
You understand that what you mean is that there isn't a single photo that can use the PD-AR-Photo license, right? Because the license applies to Argentine photos that are at least 25 years old, yet we haven't reached 2021 yet. Pardon me, but what you're saying is, simply put, ridiculous. And even more taking into account that there are thousands of photos in Wiki Commons that have been uploaded with the PD-AR-Photo license. I'm going to mention just a few but you can see them all in the Category:PD-AR-Photo:
- File:Serú_Girán_–_Grasa_De_Las_Capitales.jpg (which was already in Wiki Commons and I uploaded another version with better quality, are you going to delete it too?)
- File:1976 Nacional Aldosivi 1-Rosario Central 1 -2.png
- File:1977 Metropolitano Rosario Central 1-Unión de Santa Fe 1 -1.png
- File:1978 Metropolitano Boca Juniors 0-Rosario Central 2.png
- File:1979 Metropolitano Independiente 1-Rosario Central 2 -1.png
- File:1990 Boca Juniors 1-Rosario Central 2 -1.png
Now tell me, are you going to delete all the photos in the Category:PD-AR-Photo? Because the rules would apply to all the other photos in Wiki Commons, not just the ones uploaded by me.--Diablo del Oeste (talk) 17:57, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Diablo del Oeste: I'm not a lawyer, but presumably {{PD-AR-Photo}} would be useful for some Argentinian photos published before 1975 (assuming the URAA is valid and doesn't apply to them).
- Just because you're not the only one who's uploaded post-1975 photos doesn't mean the other people who have done that are right. Commons:URAA leaves me unsure as to whether the current Commons stance is to unilaterally ignore that the law exists.
- I'm not particularly invested in whether these photos are deleted, but Commons:Deletion requests/File:"Pato" Gasparini.jpg might be useful (or it might not be; I don't know if the rationale's valid but the file was deleted). Jc86035 (talk) 19:05, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
But according to your arguments then it doesn't matter if the Argentine photo is from before or after 1975, because all Argentine photos right now wouldn't be valid, because 25 years haven't passed yet since 1996. I checked the Category:PD-AR-Photo and there are 19,715 photos in that category... now, if we are going by your arguments, the idea of deleting 19,715 photos is just ridiculous, and moreover: why didn't you delete them before? Why only now, after years and years of them perfectly sitting in Wiki Commons?--Diablo del Oeste (talk) 19:28, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Another thing. The {{PD-AR-Photo}} license is very clear: Argentine photos that are 25 years old, or older than that, can be shown because their copyright have expired. We have to use common sense: why would the license even exist in Wiki Commons if it couldn't be used?--Diablo del Oeste (talk) 14:54, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Another thing. May I remind you that this is an issue that has been already discussed by my fellow Argentine contributors, which expressed their worry in an open letter, which you can read here: Wikimedia Argentina/Open letter regarding URAA. This letter was part of a series of letters from Israel, Spain and Venezuela. In sum: restriction of content that is perfectly legal to be shown, will jeopardize the whole Wiki project and demoralize contributors that put lots of efforts to contribute in good faith to the project.--Diablo del Oeste (talk) 15:18, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
Another thing. The following list has examples of images that would have to be deleted if you delete the photos I uploaded:
- File:Ricardo Bochini.jpg
- File:Bochini 1986 El Gráfico.jpg
- File:Bochini dominada.jpg
- File:Bertoni bochini copa.jpg
- File:Bochini (Independiente) - El Gráfico 2842.jpg
- File:Bochini (Independiente) - El Gráfico 2866.jpg
- File:Bochini (Independiente) - El Gráfico 2891.jpg
- File:Bochini (Independiente) - El Gráfico 2904.jpg
- File:Bochini (Independiente) - El Gráfico 2956.jpg
- File:Bochini -Independiente- - El Gráfico 3037.jpg
- File:Bochini bertoni.jpg
- File:Bochini vs Boca.jpg
- File:Bochini, Bertoni y Galván (Independiente) - El Gráfico 3005.jpg
- File:Bochini, Reutemann, Monzón y Vilas - El Gráfico 2881.jpg
- File:Burruchaga trossero bochini copa.jpg
- File:Burruchaga trossero bochini copa.jpg
- File:Elgrafico 3105.jpg
- File:Elgrafico 3189.jpg
- File:Grandes 10 independiente.jpg
- File:Independiente 1989.jpg
- File:Leyendas independiente.jpg
- File:Raimondo, Bochini, Galván y Balbuena (Independiente) Rogel (Selección) - El Gráfico 2871.jpg
- File:Veron cardenas bochini.jpg
- File:Soda Stereo Circa 1984.jpg
- File:Soda Stereo 1986.png
- File:El club del clan.jpg
- File:Palito Ortega.JPG
- File:Horacio Molina.JPG
- File:Violeta Rivas.JPG
- File:Johnny rivers pappo 1986.jpg
- File:Pappo.jpg
- File:RIFF.jpg
- File:Aeroblus en el Premier.jpg
- File:Charly spinetta.jpg
- File:Luis A Spinetta - Expreso Imaginario - Nov 1976.jpg
- File:Luis A. Spinetta 1974.jpg
- File:Luis Alberto Spinetta en 1976.jpg
- File:Luis Alberto Spinetta y Charly García 1984 II.jpg
- File:Luis Alberto Spinetta y Charly García 1984.jpg
- File:Luisalbertospinetta.jpg
- File:Spinetta 1976.jpg
- File:Spinetta elgrafico 1989.jpg
- File:Spinetta en 1980.jpg
- File:Spinetta en Expreso Imaginario 1976.jpg
- File:Spinetta hijos 1989.jpg
- File:David Lebón.jpg
- File:La grasa de las capitales.png
- File:Serú Girán 1980.jpg
- File:Manal.jpg
- File:Manal en vagón de tren.jpg
- File:Sui Generis (1974).jpg
- File:Billy Bond y el día del "rompan todo".jpg
- File:Billy_Bond_y_La_Pesada_del_Rock_and_Roll_-_Tontos.jpg
- File:La Pesada del Rock and Roll - Vol 2.jpg
- File:Claudio Gabis actuando en el debut de Ney Matogrosso.jpg
- File:Claudio Gabis en el Luna Park.jpg
- File:Manal tocando en la Facultad de la Universidad de Buenos Aires.jpg
- File:Jarvier Martinez y Claudio Gabis.jpg
- File:Pinchevsky mordisco 1.jpg
- File:Charly 80s.jpg
- File:Charly García - Yendo de la cama al living.jpg
- File:Charly García Luna Park 1976.png
- File:Charly García Pelo II.png
- File:Charly García Pelo.png
- File:Charly García por Alejandro Kuropatwa.jpg
- File:Clics-modernos-charly-garcia-front.jpg
- File:Serú Girán 1979.jpg
- File:Virus en 1985.jpg
- File:Federico Moura año 1987.jpg
- File:Federico Moura en 1987.jpg
- File:Viuda e Hijas de Roque Enroll 1986.png
- File:Celeste Carballo en 1982.jpg
- File:CelesteCarballogeneracion.jpg
- File:Sueter en vivo (1985).png
- File:ARA General Belgrano underway.jpg
- File:Cartel de recital de Charly García (1982).jpg
- File:Alejandrodemichele.jpg
- File:MiguelAngelErausquin.jpg
- File:34 Los Rodríguez.jpg
- File:Los Abuelos de la Nada 1983.jpg
- File:Los Abuelos de la Nada 1967.jpg
- File:Gustavo Donés.jpg
- File:MiguelAbuelolgrmsg.jpg
- File:Los Abuelos de la Nada - Cosas Mías - Vinyl.jpg
- File:Gustavo Bazterrica.JPG
- File:Silvina Garre 1982.jpg
- File:Miguel Cantilo.jpg
- File:Pedro y Pablo.jpg
- File:Ariel Ramirez.JPG
- File:Mercedes Sosa, Félix Luna y Ariel Ramírez.jpg
- File:Felixluna.jpg
- File:Félix Luna.jpg
- File:Teatro Ópera - Mercedes Sosa - 1982.jpg
- File:Rodaje de "El canto cuenta su historia".jpg
- File:Mercedessosa.jpg
- File:Mercedes Sosa.jpg
- File:Mercedes Sosa, by Annemarie Heinrich.jpg
- File:Mercedes Sosa, 1967.jpg
- File:Mercedes Sosa 2.jpg
- File:Mercedes Sosa 1970.jpg
- File:Mercedes Sosa -La voz de la zafra -1962.jpg
- File:Mercedes Sosa - Revista Gente 371.png
- File:Horacio Guarany & Mercedes Sosa (1977).jpg
- File:Canciones con fundamento - MSosa - 1965.jpg
- File:Edmundo rivero portrait.jpg
- File:Edmundo rivero guitar.jpg
- File:Raúl Alfonsin y Edmundo Rivero - 1984.jpg
- File:Leda y María.jpg
- File:Leda Valladares.jpg
- File:Osvaldo Pugliese (AGN).jpg
- File:OsvaldoPugliese.jpg
- File:Osvaldopugliese-cropped.jpg
- File:El Fastasma de Canterville - León Gieco.jpg
- File:La Banda de Caballos Cansados.jpg
- File:León Gieco en la Estudiantina de Posadas (1983).jpg
- File:León Gieco – 4º LP.jpg
- File:León Gieco – León Gieco.jpg
- File:Pensar en nada León Gieco 1981.jpg
- File:Porsuigieco - Vinilo.jpg
- File:Leon gieco-Bahia Blanca.JPG
- File:Fito Paez joven.jpg
- File:Giros 1985 Fito Paez.jpg
- File:Seru Giran 1978.jpg
- File:Serú Girán - David Lebon.jpg
- File:Junín Sandro en la Rural 19700816 LV.jpg
- File:Susana Giménez y Sandro en Tú me Enloqueces.jpg
- File:Sandro retrato.jpg
- File:Sandro-almayfuego-66.jpg
- File:Indio Skay y la Negra.jpg
- File:Los redondos en salta 1978.jpg
- File:Monona con el Indio Solari.jpg
- File:Redondos.JPG
- File:Symns con Los Redondos en 1984.jpg
- File:Symns en 1984.jpg
- File:Argentine prisoners of war - Port Stanley.JPG
- File:Indio Solari 2 color.jpg
- File:SG Special 1968.JPG
- File:Indio Solari color.jpg
- File:Rubén Sadrinas.jpg
_-_El_Gr%C3%A1fico_2842.jpg){kind=link}
_-_El_Gr%C3%A1fico_2866.jpg){kind=link}
_-_El_Gr%C3%A1fico_2891.jpg){kind=link}
_-_El_Gr%C3%A1fico_2904.jpg){kind=link}
_-_El_Gr%C3%A1fico_2956.jpg){kind=link}
_-_El_Gr%C3%A1fico_3005.jpg){kind=link}
_Rogel_(Selecci%C3%B3n)_-_El_Gr%C3%A1fico_2871.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
--Diablo del Oeste (talk) 16:46, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
So, in the light of the things I mentioned, I ask the people in charge of Wikimedia Commons to stop this irrational and unjustified deletion request that has no legal grounds. This measure seems arbitrary and capricious, and little more than harassment to good faith contributors that want to contribute positively to Wikimedia Commons. Even more: the fact that, as I have shown, there are thousands of Argentine images that have been uploaded to Wiki Commons without problem, that are hosted without problem to this very day, and that their uploaders weren't harassed at all, makes even more evident that this deletion request is an isolated incident without any legal ground. For all this, I ask all the people in charge of Wikimedia Commons to nullify this deletion request and let the images I uploaded continue to be in Wikimedia Commons, just as the thousands of Argentine photos that are hosted here because they are completely legally valid. Regards.--Diablo del Oeste (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Commons:URAA-restored copyrights: "A mere allegation that the URAA applies to a file cannot be the sole reason for deletion." see also Commons:Massive restoration of deleted images by the URAA: "URAA cannot be used as the sole reason for deletion. Deleted files can be restored after a discussion in COM:UDR. Potentially URAA-affected files should be tagged with {{Not-PD-US-URAA}}" and "The WMF does not plan to remove any content unless it has actual knowledge of infringement or receives a valid DMCA takedown notice. To date, no such notice has been received under the URAA. We are not recommending that community members undertake mass deletion of existing content on URAA grounds, without such actual knowledge of infringement or takedown notices." -- Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 20:48, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Agree with everything written above by both Diablo_del_Oeste and Slowking4.--Cabeza2000 (talk) 17:03, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per Commons:URAA-restored copyrights and Commons:Massive restoration of deleted images by the URAA; a mere allegation that the URAA applies to a file cannot be the sole reason for deletion. Banfield - Amenazas aquí 15:53, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep per this DR debate that reaffirms what other users stated above. - Fma12 (talk) 16:03, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: by User:Gbawden. --JuTa 21:46, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Diablo del Oeste (talk · contribs)
[edit]Scan an crops from an newspaper article published in 16 December 1977 in Argentina (see for example File:Laopinion08.png). The images that have a text are still copyrighted in Argentina (70 years pma). The photos are currently in the public domain in Argentina, but they were not in 1996 at URAA time. Thus, the article and photos are still protected in the USA. We cannot keep these files due to precautionary principle.
- File:Laopinion23.png
- File:Laopinion08.png
- File:Laopinion22.png
- File:Laopinion21.png
- File:Laopinion20.png
- File:Laopinion19.png
- File:Laopinion18.png
- File:Laopinion17.png
- File:Laopinion16.png
- File:Laopinion15.png
- File:Laopinion14.png
- File:Laopinion13.png
- File:Laopinion12.png
- File:Laopinion11.png
- File:Laopinion09.png
- File:Laopinion07.jpg
- File:Laopinion10.png
- File:Laopinion05.jpg
- File:Laopinion06.jpg
- File:Laopinion04.jpg
- File:Laopinion01.jpg
- File:Laopinion03.jpg
- File:Laopinion02.jpg
Günther Frager (talk) 13:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Materialscientist (talk) 08:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 04:46, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 15:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
No FoP in Sri Lanka, the tower is prominent enough that fails de minimis A1Cafel (talk) 08:02, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 15:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
_(14).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FoP in France, artist Pierre Bazin died in 1991 A1Cafel (talk) 04:16, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
_(14).jpg){kind=link}
- @A1Cafel Hello This is a global view of the Place Aristide Briand square (Amiens), for which I have made no reference to the artist Pierre Bazin. The statue is barely visible here, so there's nothing to complain about the copyright. Best regards Pierre André (talk) 09:00, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- IMO the statue is quite protruding that it may fails COM:DM France. --A1Cafel (talk) 15:43, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom, the statue is slap bang in the middle of the photo. --Gbawden (talk) 09:27, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
_(14).jpg){kind=link}
© 2018 - 2023 IZUM – Institut informacijskih znanosti, Maribor ZimskoSonce (talk) 20:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:28, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
© 2018 - 2023 IZUM – Institut informacijskih znanosti, Maribor ZimskoSonce (talk) 20:34, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:28, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Louconne (talk) 10:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:28, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Grave of Ariel Ramirez (died in 2010) in Buenos Aires. There is no freedom of panorama for non-architectural works in Argentina. Günther Frager (talk) 11:36, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; no FOP for sculptures in Argentina. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:17, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
,_Chatham_Bus_Station,_19_December_2017.jpg){kind=link}
,_31_October_2018_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_Waterfront_Way_(Chatham_Bus_Station),_19_December_2017.jpg){kind=link}
,_31_October_2018.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_Chatham_Bus_Station,_17_January_2018.jpg){kind=link}
,_Chatham_Bus_Station,_17_January_2018_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
_rear_view.jpg){kind=link}
_front_view.jpg){kind=link}
_front_view.jpg){kind=link}
_rear_view.jpg){kind=link}
_CRDi_(India)_rear_view.jpg){kind=link}
_CRDi_(India)_front_view.jpg){kind=link}
Files in Category:Other speedy deletions
[edit]Nominated G7 by uploader, but ineligible due to age. These are high quality, hand drawn works and could be within scope, so kicking them to DR.
- File:Theophilus the Wolf (separated) (without shading variant).png
- File:Harvett Fox (2021 version) (separated) (without shading and shadow variant).png
- File:Fox (Silvio B.) - Happy Fox Pop Day (separated) (without shading variant).png
_(without_shading_variant).png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(separated)_(without_shading_and_shadow_variant).png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_Happy_Fox_Pop_Day_(separated)_(without_shading_variant).png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 10:08, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy delete all because those variants are unnecessary. - THV | ♂ | U | T - 10:13, 15 January 2024 (UTC); edited: 10:25, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: These are high quality works, I commend the uploader for their artistry, courtesy deletion is granted. --Abzeronow (talk) 22:04, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
No FoP for 3D works in Russia A1Cafel (talk) 03:41, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
- Keep This is a typical object of park and gardening art, which is not under copyright restriction. Alexander Novikov (talk) 09:35, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Question Garden art is not protected by copyright? --A1Cafel (talk) 05:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
- Not protected in Russia. You can see the law here: http://pravo.gov.ru/proxy/ips/?docbody=&nd=102110716 . Article 1276 (part 2) of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. I can't find this law in English, but you can use Google Translate. Alexander Novikov (talk) 21:08, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - as per COM:FOP Russia I am unable to see this sculpture as a work of garden design just because it is located in a garden, furthermore not sure if it is a garden. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:00, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Dana.karimpoor (talk) 21:48, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:54, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
