Commons:Deletion requests/File:Girl at Piccadilly Circus.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.

Person is probably added to image, because uploader seems not to be trustable JaneArt (talk) 14:36, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are nominating your own Images for deletion with that reasoning?--Tobias ToMar Maier (talk) 20:13, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, all must go. Please refer to deletion request regarding my image "Bikini gril at the beach.jpg". Possibly more will have to go too. Thank you, best regards, Jan — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaneArt (talk • contribs) 2020-11-05 12:11:05 (UTC)

Are you actually loosing your mind? I mean how old are you?--Tobias ToMar Maier (talk) 14:30, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please try to keep a civil tone. I started photographing in 1958. I have tried to make a rational decision actually based on the statements written about me and my contributions at Commons:

  • The image in question is not believed to be my work.

If so, than most of my uploads are not believed to be my work.

  • - The reason given is that the uploader does not give the impression of a trustable on ... " Own work!!! Please, I am not suspecting too much"
  • - "I agree this is fishy ...

My contributions to Commons and Wikipedia are gravely humiliated. And most of all: these statements are for the whole Wikipedia- and Commons community to read the last month. I am actually feeling sick, thinking of these concequences - and now you ask: "Are you actually loosing you mind?" !!!! I have uploaded a B&W raw negative from the same film as the image in question, showing that I am the owner and that the face is the same. The damage is done, the images must go. With respect, Jan — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaneArt (talk • contribs) 2020-11-05 20:20:28 (UTC)

in case you didn't understand it, there are two problems: #1 The images in question appear to be extremely retouched. #2 You made a gallery with images you've supposedly found on commons but they are your own. How do you find your own images that you've uploaded? That does not compute. Note: I had two grand parents die on me with dementia.--Tobias ToMar Maier (talk) 21:02, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tobias! Thank you for response, and sorry for your loss, but don't understand the connection. However, what makes this episode very uncomfortable is the disrespectful treatment openly for the whole community, and without any effort warning the contributor. There is no mention of heavy retouching in the deletion discussion. The "fishy" case is still open and "needs an investigation"! What gives? Most film images needs retouching, sometimes more than others. I think this one was acceptable despite being partly destroyed. Having two or more user accounts is quite normal. The other account was originally meant for exactly what it states, but soon added own images as well. Is that wrongdoing? Mr. E4024 sits in Turkey and does not want insults; personal attacks on his user page! What a person! Mr. Infrogmation however, has always behaved like gentleman in my opinion. I still expect my requests to be followed through. Regards Jan — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaneArt (talk • contribs) 2020-11-06 01:09:13 (UTC)

Hello Tobias. - The matter is now dealt with at the proper place. Please delete this image as proposed now. Thank you for your advice. Best regards, -- Jan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.203.67.55 (talk • contribs) 2020-11-07 11:36:55 (UTC)

  •  Keep, as licences are not revokable. @JaneArt: Being «humiliated» by unwarrented deletion requests filed by assorted busybodies (acting, as we all, in their own individual names, not as Commons as a whole) is a bummer I can understand really well and fully sympathise with, but that’s not a valid reason to delete. @Tobias ToMar Maier: You’re not helping. -- Tuválkin 16:26, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep per Tuvalkin. I'm sorry JaneArt for the baseless accusations you've had aimed at you by a particular editor. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:28, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • User:JaneArt, I apologise for my words "...the uploader does not give the impression of a trustable one." I recognize it was not nice. If you look at my userpage statement on civility you will see that I myself am against this kind of rude expressions. I am really sorry. Take care. 02:48, 9 November 2020 (UTC)E4024 (talk)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 09:58, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]