Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Graffiti in London

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.

FoP 2D UK nnnnn

Dfvdsfgsdfgsdfgsfgsdfgsdfgsdfhs (talk) 15:52, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Info This is a haphazard deletion request, each of these should have proper scrutiny on the basis of being copyright ineligible, such as simple text statements. At best graffiti has debatable copyright and in the case of vandalism is considered to be ineligible for copyright protection as it legally cannot have value. -- (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep badcat, pd-text or pd-shape applies. -- (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep "CEPT" series, simple text. -- (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep "sherlock" text graffiti only. -- (talk) 16:16, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Vandalised Class 465, simple tagging apart from what may be cartoon type vandalism at a severe angle to the camera, making it de minimis and certainly not the focus of the photograph. -- (talk) 16:21, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Tulse Hill railway station MMB, nothing but copyright ineligible text. -- (talk) 16:22, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep This is an indiscriminate and nonsense deletion request. Tantamount to vandalism. Ardfern (talk) 16:55, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dfvdsfgsdfgsdfgsfgsdfgsdfgsdfhs: please withdraw this DR. You have nominated a large number of copyright ineligible images, randomly sampling this massive list of files is an adequate test of that fact. It is your duty to pay reasonable diligence to potential copyright status issues like this before raising any very large mass deletion request, not the duty of original uploaders, many of whom will be inactive due to retirement from the project or to being busy during the pandemic. -- (talk) 16:18, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep We should close this DR. Individual images can be renominated and discussed individually. --Jarekt (talk) 17:15, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Not clear there is a valid deletion rationale here. Conesnsus seems to quickly be that this is not a helpful nomination. --GMGtalk 17:34, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]