Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:FoP-Ukraine

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.

Files in Category:FoP-Ukraine

Unfortunately, there is no Freedom of Panorama exemption in Ukraine. A bunch of these file have been tagged {{NoFoP-Ukraine}} for a long time, so am nominating most of the category. Not currently nominating File:2005-08-15_Maidan_Nezalezhnosti_Kiev_261.JPG (which survived a DR last year). For all of the nominated files (with the possible exception of File:Zaporizhzhya_-_Bridge_over_the_Dnipro_river.JPG and File:Kpt Jan Nalepka Ovruc UA.jpg), the artwork in question does not seem de minimis to me.

~~File:FC-Shakhtar-Donetsk-Info-Center.jpg~~ withdrawn per NickK, see below.

Storkk (talk) 13:27, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete everything. And Wikimedia Commons, too. Just in case. There could be some violations of some kind. Orthodox copyright priests would find something on any image. Or may be it is not about copyright totalitarianism? What do people do who don't know what to do with their life? They write deletion requests. --C.G. (talk) 17:47, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: This meant

Keep. --C.G. (talk) 19:31, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep kein Grund für Löschungen erkennbar. Bitte ggf. für jedes einzeln Bild begründen, was eine URV sein soll. So ist das nur verkappter Vandalismus. --ST ○ 19:16, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Setting aside the ad hominems, classy and witty though they are: there's nothing I can find to rebut in C.G.'s argument, because I can't find an argument... This is a discussion, not a vote. ST seems to be raising a procedural issue and claims that I should have opened individual DRs. No, this is precisely what a mass deletion request is for: where the rationale for deletion is the same, and the discussion can be collected in one place so that one doesn't need to make the same argument on many DRs. Anyway, the rationale for each image is that it has been found by an editor to violate copyright in Ukraine because it is a depiction of a three-dimensional work where no evidence has been given that that work is in the Public Domain. Ukraine is one of the long list of countries that does not have a Freedom of Panorama exception to its copyright laws, which means that in Ukraine, these images violate the rights of their respective creators. Wikimedia Commons has a longstanding and solid policy of only accepting images that are free in both the country of origin and the US, with the only exception I am aware of being faithful representations of two-dimensional works that would be PD in the US. Storkk (talk) 07:19, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ist dir eventuell auch aufgefallen, dass einzelne Werke noch aus der Sowjetunion stammen? Das hier von dir betriebene Löschverfahren ist eine Farce und keine Diskussion. Peinlich. --ST ○ 19:19, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - Your argument is really that no works created in the Soviet union deserve protection, or am I reading you wrong (very possible)? Storkk (talk) 23:58, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      - Abhängig vom Alter der Werke ist deren Schutz auch unter den Gesichtspunkten des Sowjetischen Urheberrechts zu bewerten und eine mögliche Gemeinfreiheit zu bedenken. Die Sowj. Autoren wurden über die Allunionsverwaltung für den Schutz der Autorenrechte für die staatliche Enteignung ihrer Werke entschädigt. Zudem sind bei einigen Bildern die möglicherweise geschützten "Werke" nur Beiwerk. Wurde das bei jedem Bild in die Bewertung mit einbezogen? --ST ○ 16:32, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. russavia (talk) 00:17, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- @Russavia: - could you comment on whether you think the depicted work in either File:Zaporizhzhya_-_Bridge_over_the_Dnipro_river.JPG or File:Kpt Jan Nalepka Ovruc UA.jpg is de minimis? Thanks! Storkk (talk) 07:19, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Provisionally withdrawing File:Museum of the Great Patriotic War - Kiev - 002.jpg, but a consensus would be good - is the rationale previously given (that its main subject is the COA of the Soviet Union) enough to make any artistic work depicted de minimis? Storkk (talk) 12:28, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom; none is de minimis here. --Eleassar ^(t/p) 13:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete some (with a dash of salt, or at least a spoonful of bad-tasting nuts and seeds), Keep some. Delete files that focus on the copyrighted objects. Keep files that are focused on a person or something else not eligible for copyright. --UpEpSilon (talk) 05:32, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Kept File:Zaporizhzhya - Bridge over the Dnipro river.JPG: it is 1920s building ⇒ in PD.--Anatoliy (talk) 20:10, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Anatoliy - in your closing of the previous DR, you said "Built in 30s", could you explain this a little more, please? Did the creator die before 1951? This seems to be the salient question. I've unstruck the it again, and hope you don't mind. Storkk (talk) 23:53, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Architector Vesnin died in 1950, it is before 1951. So it is good.--Anatoliy (talk) 00:24, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep File:Ivano-FRANKIVSK (3).jpg (pictures and is used as a picture of the main street of the city, out of 4 buildings pictured only one is not in public domain — NickK (talk) 22:05, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep File:FC-Shakhtar-Donetsk-Info-Center.jpg — falls under {{PD-UA}} as a logo of an organisation — NickK (talk) 22:05, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Withdrawn - {{PD-UA-exempt}} under category (d) Storkk (talk) 23:53, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Concerning File:Donetsk 0067.jpg and File:Donetsk 0063.jpg, the case is not a clear one. The architect of the building, Ludwig Kotovskyi, died in 1947 and thus the entire building is {{PD-Ukraine}}, but it is unclear if he was the author of these two particular works himself or not — NickK (talk) 22:05, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Closing this discussion as kept. There were 4 Keeps and 3 Deletes above. Perhaps the results for individual pictures would be different with individual nominations with clearer explanation of the issues for each one. Giant omnibus nominations like this are usually less productive and harder to clear through. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:21, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: 4 Keeps, 3 Deletes, too many files to consider as a unit. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:22, 10 April 2014 (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.

Files in Category:FoP-Ukraine

Derivative work per Commons:Freedom of panorama#Ukraine

ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 10:11, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep File:Ukraine Oblast Cherson Verwaltung.jpg - normales Gebäude, kein Kunstwerk. Die Skulptur ist Beiwerk. --Ralf Roleček 12:49, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep File:Ukraine Oblast Cherson Verwaltung.jpg siehe Ralf Roletschek. --ST ○ 12:55, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Delete the whole of Ukraine per Wladimir Putin and his oligarch friends. This is a politicel deletion request an a war with other means. --ST ○ 13:02, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Steschke, please be civil in your comments. Sealle (talk) 15:09, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
File:Syevyerodonetsk 17.jpg is a building of a very simple architectural design. The details are barely visibile in this photo. Probably isn't really copyrightable. I'd say Keep this photo, also per previous precedents for similar cases. XXN, 22:25, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep so it is. --ST ○ 22:28, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File:Славутич-Арена.jpg is questionable as well. XXN, 22:25, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Close the entire nomination as Keep. Too many files for a meaningful discussion, thus should be closed in the same way as the previous blanket nomination. FOP argument is irrelevant to many files for a variety of reasons, such as (note: I added only one example for each type, I am unable to review all the files, it is likely that more than one file meets each argument):
- Already kept per discussion, e.g. File:2005-08-15 Maidan Nezalezhnosti Kiev 261.JPG
- Photo of an object that is in PD for many years, e.g. File:Пам'ятник Ришельє-3.JPG (Category:Statue of the Duc de Richelieu in Odessa is a well-known monument, its author en:Ivan Martos died in 1835)
- Too simple to meet COM:TOO, e.g. File:Syevyerodonetsk 17.jpg (Ukrainian law states that only "art of architecture" is protected and not all buildings, and this perfect rectangular building is unlikely copyrightable)
- A copyrightable object is not the main part of the image, e.g. File:Пристань теплоходів взимку.JPG (picture of a berth used in the article about the pond, with buildings on the background being strictly occasional and not bringing any added value)
To sum up, too many cases here for a meaningful discussion, nominator should provide individual arguments per image so that the community can discuss this — NickK (talk) 22:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per discussion. ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, this is rather ill-prepared and messy-styled request one can even find disruptive. I warn you to abstain from doing so again. Any file of mentioned above can be renominated for deletion separately, depending on age, matter and other characteristics of the original work depicted. --Sealle (talk) 10:59, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:FoP-Ukraine

Files in Category:FoP-Ukraine

Files in Category:FoP-Ukraine

Navigation menu

Search