Commons:Deletion requests/File:Enrique Simonet - Flevit super illam - 1892.jpg

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.

New file better quality File:Enrique Simonet - Flevit super illam 1892.jpg 79.158.234.69 17:19, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Both files are difeent versions of the same painting and are of the same quality and not duplicates. In fact this version has twice the resolution. Tm (talk) 13:21, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE If you check this link (Museo del Prado official site) https://www.museodelprado.es/coleccion/obra-de-arte/flevit-super-illam/498b0344-ee49-435c-bfd7-ff707d728975 you will realize the new version is much better accurate about color reproduction and the old version is very bad a poor reproduction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.158.234.69 (talk • contribs) 10:51, 28 March 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per User:Tm. P 1 9 9   14:47, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.

It is obsolete, new better quality version File:Enrique Simonet - Flevit super illam 1892.jpg 90.94.25.235 00:49, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Again after a year an anonymous IP opens a new deletion request with the same arguments as the last DR? Quoting my statement in the last DR: "Both files are difeent versions of the same painting and are of the same quality and not duplicates. In fact this version has twice the resolution." Tm (talk) 03:36, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Daphne Lantier 19:10, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]