Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Justus Lipsius building

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
  • Add {{delete|reason=Fill in reason for deletion here!|subpage=Category:Justus Lipsius building|year=2025|month=January|day=13}} to the description page of each file.
  • Notify the uploader(s) with {{subst:idw||Category:Justus Lipsius building|plural}} ~~~~
  • Add {{Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Justus Lipsius building}} at the end of today's log.

Category:Justus Lipsius building

[edit]

The Category:Justus Lipsius building contains images some of which are of the exterior of a copyrighted building in Brussels, Belgium, where there is no Freedom of Panorama. For previous deletion discussions see here and here. I have listed those images that I feel cannot rely on the de minimis defense and that appear to depict sufficient creative aspects to be copyright protected.

I left the following out, as they might fall under de minimis (I might be wrong though): File:EU Council Room.jpg, File:Eudist.jpg, File:Jean-Claude Juncker in Justus Lipsius (2005).jpg, File:Justus Lipsius South.jpg, File:Justus Lipsius, Eastern side.jpg, File:Lipsius-statue.jpg, File:Meeting room for ambassadors.JPG, and File:Meeting room for working groups.JPG. 84user (talk) 03:23, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well firstly de minimis does apply to EU Council and the Commission.jpg as only a fraction of a dozen buildings are shown. It is more a photo of the Rue de la Loi. Generally though Justus Lipsius is of no architectural merit. It is just a rather dull office building so applying Belgian FOP restrictions would be an overly strict interpretation of Belgian law.- J.Logan`t: 10:18, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose per what JLogan said. If the Justus Lipsius building per se is known for anything at all, it's for its underwhelming, dull architecture. - Ssolbergj (talk) 11:17, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose - I think that there are grounds to believe that these blanket deletions are over-zealous, as User:M0tty has argued in the past. Certainly in this case I think we could keep at least, File:EU Council and the Commission.jpg, and File:Schuman ground renos 2011.jpg. In both cases the building takes up less than 50% of the picture, and is not the primary subject. A record should be kept of deletions so that if conditions change in the future we can rescue the pictures. Peregrine981 (talk) 16:09, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep - File:EU Council and the Commission.jpg is just a street views of Brussels. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:05, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Agree that this image is a streetscape.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:02, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep File:EU Council and the Commission.jpg,  Delete rest. I agree that the Justus Lipsius is of no architectural merit, but its design still meets the definition of "originality" (reflects the personality of the creator) in the Belgian copyright law, which explicitly states that it is not necessary that the work holds any aesthetic value. --Xijky (talk) 21:17, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Deleted all except EU Council and the Commission.jpg and Schuman ground renos 2011. The design of the building holds distinct creativity (esp. windows). De minimis applies to both images judging my past experience in similar scenarios. Those arguing "dull architecture" can be challeneged and thus Commons:Precautionary principle. --ZooFari 01:47, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Category:Justus_Lipsius_building&oldid=325886389"