Commons:Deletion requests/File:Honeysuckle Weeks.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.
Dubious claim of own work. No exif and clearly a professional photo. PCP Gbawden (talk) 18:46, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Keep Zero proofs that this image is a copyright violation. Having no exif is no proof of copyright violation, in fact many times i could point some cases "clearly a professional" images in Commons that were taken by the uploaders but given several facts (not wanting to reveal their real personal name, profession, etc) they were striped of exif before the upload or, in some cases, after the original upload. Given that they are always in high resolution, as this case and given that a Tineye and Google Images search only yield either mirrors of wikipedia or sites that are riff with copyright violations, there is zero proof of this being a copyright violation. In fact File:Honeysuckle Weeks 2018.jpg also upload by the same user has the description "Photoshoot with actress Honeysuckle Weeks. Sussex 2018" and has zero hits in Google Images and Tineye. Tm (talk) 19:26, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- Also in talk page of File:Nuevo Editorial Shoot - Honeysuckle Weeks.jpg, an image by the same user you can read that this last image is in a blog (albeit in much lower resolution and uploaded one year and month after the upload to Commons) and that " Maybe the uploader also owns that blog. The same photo appeared on IMDB, likely uploaded around the same time it was uploaded here. Presumably also by the uploader. Didn't find this quality elsewhere, nor anything that clearly predates it". Tm (talk) 19:31, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- And before someone says that this file could be from IMDB, that site is also riff with stolen photos, some taken from Commons. One eample is File:Erica Ellyson 2010.jpg, an image taken by Glenn Francism professional photographer that had his identity established with OTRS 2008122210029427, that can be seen on as the lead photo of this actress, stolen without any proper atributtion. Tm (talk) 19:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- Also in talk page of File:Nuevo Editorial Shoot - Honeysuckle Weeks.jpg, an image by the same user you can read that this last image is in a blog (albeit in much lower resolution and uploaded one year and month after the upload to Commons) and that " Maybe the uploader also owns that blog. The same photo appeared on IMDB, likely uploaded around the same time it was uploaded here. Presumably also by the uploader. Didn't find this quality elsewhere, nor anything that clearly predates it". Tm (talk) 19:31, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- Keep The first version of File:Nuevo Editorial Shoot - Honeysuckle Weeks.jpg (corrupted JPEG) looks exactly like a mistake someone would make when editing their own photos, and is highly unlikely to be stolen from the Internet. This photo is just a crop of that. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:38, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
- Doesn't look professional to me. Very casual clothes and setting, absolutely no makeup and obvious acne blemish on cheek. No, not professional at all. Taken spur of the moment possibly by a close friend. 174.64.17.141 12:08, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Rosenzweig τ 07:30, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
