Commons:Deletion requests/File:Vice President Mike Pence and Nicholas Alahverdian.jpg
user request Bubbasax (talk) 15:56, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
self-request Bubbasax (talk) 16:44, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
- Why do you want it deleted, and why the more than 2 year wait after it was uploaded? -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:56, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Bubbasax: I see you uploaded many pictures of Nicholas Alahverdian, of widely disparate qualities. Could you please confirm whether you were, as you claimed at upload, the photographer of these files? If so, we probably cannot delete them, since they are correctly licensed. If you are actually the subject, then you likely never had the authority to upload them in the first place, and they can (where they are not US Government works) be deleted as copyright violations. Storkk (talk) 08:57, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Kept, this is selfie as claimed. No acceptable reason for deletion is presented. Uploader's request is valid reason only during first week after upload; here 2 years have passed. Educational value exists. Taivo (talk) 11:56, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
As the owner of the photo I am Bubbasax (talk) 10:30, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
Closing this one since the user has opened two different deletion requests, and this one restates an earlier closed one. (The other deletion request which I've left open has a different statement of reason.) Bubbasax - please only open one deletion request for a particular image at a time. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:07, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
Stolen from Facebook and other personal websites Bubbasax (talk) 10:54, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
Comment Clarify please - so you are not the actual creator of this photo, but took it off someone else's facebook page? -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:09, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion - image has EXIF from iPhone -- no evidence of FB at all. Bubbasax, if you nominate this again, you will be blocked from editing on Commons. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:18, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
The uploader has a history of uploading copyvios related to this same Nicholas Alahverdian subject. This is just as likely to be a copyvio lifted from Facebook or similar as his other uploads were. EnPassant (talk) 21:11, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
- There's been a mostly successful attempt at deleting all the real photos of Nicholas Alahverdian, while a fake photo of Nicholas Alahverdian was promoted as truth. I think we need firmer proof to delete this. Starship.paint (talk) 14:53, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
- Delete as likely copyright violation given the uploader's other files. People who perpetuate a hoax and upload copyvios should not be trusted. PanAndScan (talk) 20:52, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep as per the previous rationales. Note that the above user has been globally locked as an xwiki sock. Praxidicae (talk) 19:13, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. The exif data looks fine, and reverse image search via TinEye and Google Images doesn't reveal any evidence of copyright violation. Dylsss (talk) 20:45, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Since there was an attempt to introduce a phony image of this person, I think it is worth having a legitimate image of Alahverdian in case there is another case of identity hoaxing. Liz (talk) 01:15, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
The intellectual property that is the subject of this correspondence consists of two original works owned and authored by The Nicholas Alahverdian Trust (hereafter referred to as "The NA Trust" or "The Trust) in the form of photographs. This is one of those photographs. The photographs are not in the public domain in any country, nor are they freely licensed and are therefore illegally uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons platform by users who do not have the requisite permission or license. The Wikimedia users who uploaded these images intentionally misrepresented any permission or license from The NA Trust as none was given. The NA Trust is left to resolve that internet users who may be the Wikimedia users themselves or users associated with them downloaded the photographs from the Trust website, Flickr account, or through another website, and uploaded the photographs with a falsified copyright tag and made false representations about ownership and copyright. This allowed the photographs, which are the intellectual property of The NA Trust, to be used across Wikimedia projects without license or permission from The NA Trust. The uploads were processed deceptively and violated applicable copyright laws. Patently false information about the license, copyright, and ownership status was given on the file description pages accompanying the photographs. The two photographs that are relevant to this correspondence are the work product of workers, contractors, freelancers, or volunteers of The NA Trust who, as part of their work-related responsibilities and duties outlined in their contract, assisted in the taking of photographs of officers and trustees of The NA Trust along with other guests and people at events that were Trust-sponsored or attended by officers or trustees of The NA Trust. At no time did any Trust employee, contractor, or volunteer violate their contractual obligation regarding the ownership of these two or any other photographs. As a result of the unauthorized uploading of these two photographs, The Trust, as described earlier, is sufficiently confident that they were downloaded as unlicensed copies of photographs published on website(s) owned or contracted with The Trust to host intellectual property on the basis that Trust property would be viewed solely in context with the articles or photographic essays or albums published by The Trust, which would include works authored by the Trust such as essays, photographs, videos, and other media. At no point did The Trust grant permission, license, or otherwise allow in any way for the Wikipedia Commons users to upload original works considered copyrighted intellectual property in the form of photographs authored by The NA Trust under a contractual basis with Trust employees, interns, and volunteers. To conclude, under the Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter section COM:NETCOPYVIO it unequivocally states that “[t]he vast majority of images found on the internet are copyright-protected and may not be uploaded. The fact that an image has been posted to a publicly-available website does not give you implied permission to re-use it nor to upload it here. Many websites are silent on copyright issues, but images on those sites are just as off-limits as those on sites which explicitly say “Copyright, all rights reserved.” Works are copyrighted by default; a copyright notice or a © sign is not needed.” On The Trust website, and on any website or platform where The Trust contracted for exhibition of any intellectual property, a detailed copyright notice informing the viewer that the intellectual property was copyrighted by The NA Trust was published along with a © sign and the message “Copyright (year). All rights reserved” when those safeguards are not necessary only as an abundance of caution. As a result of the copyrighted photographs owned by The NA Trust which were downloaded from the Internet by Wikimedia Commons users who were not given permission or license to upload the original works owned by The Trust to Wikimedia Commons and later intentionally misrepresented the copyright and actual ownership of the works, we respectfully ask that this photograph and the other photograph tagged as a copyright violation that are the subject of this correspondence, as well as the cropped version of one of the photographs located on the same page, be deleted and permanently removed from Wikimedia servers in accordance with copyright law of the United States and Wikimedia Commons policies, guidelines, regulations, and procedures. Thoughtful and Considerate (talk) 14:30, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
- So it's the intellectual property of an unregistered trust of a dead guy? How curious. This was uploaded by the subject themselves with full meta data many years ago. This legal screed has no basis in reality and this should be kept. Praxidicae (talk) 18:38, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
- Keep: https://www.nicholasalahverdian.com/surviving-torture/ keeps exactly the same photo File:Vice President Mike Pence and Nicholas Alahverdian.jpg, but that's no proof because it was uploaded to Commons in 2017. The domain nicholasalahverdian.com has been created in 2018 according to domaintools.com. --Achim (talk) 22:02, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
- Keep The image and Exif data are consistent with a selfie and not at all with being copied from Facebook, which strips Exif data from images. Noting also what Dylsss and Achim say and that there is no indication that the image is improperly licensed. On the screed above, the so-called 'Nicholas Alahverdian Trust' does not appear to exist outside a few blog posts, and the writer is now glocked as 'Long-term abuse' with multiple sockpuppets (quelle surprise!) including the 'delete' voter above, PanAndScan. The sockpuppetry can be disregarded. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:21, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
- Keep no evidence of copyright issues, per comments above. sock puppetry nominations. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 04:17, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
- The nominator is a patroller at EN:WP, FYI. E4024 (talk) 04:25, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
- I was referring to the tagging/nominations by Thoughtful and Considerate amongst others, eg Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nicholas Alahverdian and Andre Dubus III.jpg and the now closed ones above. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 04:30, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry, as always it's me who is mistaken. I hope I did not hurt your feelings. I apologize. E4024 (talk) 04:36, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
- Nah, reading it over my comment was understandably ambiguous/unclear. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 21:56, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry, as always it's me who is mistaken. I hope I did not hurt your feelings. I apologize. E4024 (talk) 04:36, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
- I was referring to the tagging/nominations by Thoughtful and Considerate amongst others, eg Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nicholas Alahverdian and Andre Dubus III.jpg and the now closed ones above. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 04:30, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
- The nominator is a patroller at EN:WP, FYI. E4024 (talk) 04:25, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
- Keep The file seems to be in order, an "own work" with EXIF, and in scope; what else do we need? E4024 (talk) 04:45, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Kept: "PanAndScan" and "Thoughtful and Considerate" ignored as some sort of LTA; otherwise there is consensus as usual for keep. --DMacks (talk) 19:21, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
