Commons:Deletion requests/File:=Фото Бойчука 006.jpg
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.
naked minority ----modern_primat ඞඞඞ TALK 14:10, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Modern primat
Keep It shows the whole body of a baby in an ordinary context. It’s not abusive. Also, it seems to be legitimately in use at uk:Мирослав Бойчук. Brianjd (talk) 10:31, 26 October 2022 (UTC) - delete is' foto publicate in ukwiki and delete as not VRT. Need VRT-ticket--『白猫』Обг. 15:10, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- @AlexKozur The ukwiki article was moved to user space, but user page images of users with significant contributions are also permitted. Why does it need a VRT ticket? A 1958 photo isn’t going to have camera metadata. Do you have evidence it is a copyright violation? Brianjd (talk) 12:10, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, because as first upload uk:File:Фото Бойчука 006.jpg: uploader Мирослав Бойчук or Frankivsktv (i don't know is one or more people), author родинні архіви М.Бойчука.
- User uses Boychuk's photo archives, and it is not known whether it is him or not, because the files have been published on Ukrainian Wikipedia for a long time. The user notes that he is his countryman, but whether he has legal permission to publish these files is unknown.
- (uk:Користувач використовує фотоархівів Бойчука, і невідомо чи це він сам чи ні, бо файли були довгий час опубліковані на українській Вікіпедії. Користувач зазначає, що він є його земляком, але чи має він юридичний дозвіл на публікацію цих файлів невідомо.) 『白猫』Обг. 12:29, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
- @AlexKozur The ukwiki article was moved to user space, but user page images of users with significant contributions are also permitted. Why does it need a VRT ticket? A 1958 photo isn’t going to have camera metadata. Do you have evidence it is a copyright violation? Brianjd (talk) 12:10, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
Delete per COM:PRP. There is insufficient evidence of compatible licensing combined with unresolved privacy issues, compounded by the subject being a minor. --Xover (talk) 09:11, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:40, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
