Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Observation towers in Slovenia

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.

Copyrightable towers, created after 1945.

Eleassar (t/p) 20:52, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination --Eleassar (t/p) 00:43, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: withdrawn by nominator Morning (talk) 05:10, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]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.

Per COM:FOP Slovenia: non-free architecture; outside the scope of Commons.

TadejM (t/p) 09:57, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Creative design choices had to be made here, which makes these copyrightable architectural works. --TadejM (t/p) 21:42, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We even had a court case in Slovenia where the court found sales stands to be copyrighted.[1] This is much more complex. --TadejM (t/p) 22:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep as too simple and functional structures. I do not agree with the sales stand counter-example. I could see considerable room for creativity in a sales stand that I do not see here IronGargoyle (talk) 00:47, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can also see considerable room for creativity in observation towers, just as much as with a sales stand. Both are a utility structure. I made a preselection and have left the less creative ones (e.g. [2]) out of the DR. --TadejM (t/p) 12:29, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per consensus. --King of ♥ 11:00, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]