Commons:Deletion requests/File:Namaste.jpg
http://www.chariot-tours.com/images/namaste%20welcome.gif + Logo being used on several websites, and cannot be considered as simple geometry.. ...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 17:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Comment I must say, you are gaming policies against the spirit of policies (same tactics you tried at ml.wp before you get renamed here). I am sure that you know this image is a very old popular welcome image in India (sometimes even before centuries) and so in PD (because you are Indian). One can observe same image is carved on the doors of old palaces. I know that people not familiar with Indian origin images may feel you are right but I think deleting images like this ultimately no good for the project. I am also sure that you also know it is really hard to find any source of any of these images you are continuously trying to delete. If you really want to contribute, find source informations.--Praveen:talk 18:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- If you can't show any evidence the image is old, then we can't keep it.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:56, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Keep - This is a very popular image in India.--Praveen:talk 18:36, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Delete The obligation is on the uploader to provide complete correct source information. If we can't provide clear source information, we must delete, India or not.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:56, 31 January 2011 (UTC)- Delete: the basic principle of copyright law is that ideas are not copyrightable, but expressions of ideas are. No one can copyright the idea of the namaste, which is certainly very ancient, but of course modern depictions of the namaste (such as this image) are fully copyrightable. If there are indeed images of the namaste carved on to ancient temple doors that are in the public domain, then such images can be photographed and uploaded here. Alternatively, an editor can create his or her own drawing of a namaste and upload it here after having released it into the public domain or licensed it under a free licence. But one cannot randomly take an illustration from the Internet and upload it here without any evidence that that illustration is in the public domain. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 14:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
- Comment This was uploaded over another, very different, file, which at least has a fair presumption of being in scope and validly licensed. This DR should just delete the new upload and leave the old one.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:32, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- Comment: I am entirely with Prosfilaes here. There is no way we should even be considering the image that was here when this discussion started. It is certainly not public
- Comment: uploader claimed original work. Given that it was uploaded over another image, and is apparently not original work, I don't think we need to waste time sorting out details. Just revert to earlier image (and earlier description). - Jmabel ! talk 03:11, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- Comment: I'm afraid we can't use the original work either. It is a copyright violation from iStockphoto. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 05:19, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
- Comment Both are copyvio's...delete.....Captain......Tälk tö me.. 09:17, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by User:Axpde as copyvio Powers (talk) 19:50, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
