Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Dülferstraße
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.
Files in Category:U-Bahnhof Dülferstraße
[edit]Creators were Peter Lanz and Ricarda Dietz. Both are still alive. This art in this train station is probably not covered by the freedom of panorama either, since it was recorded inside a building and the German freedom of panorama does not apply to public interiors either.
- File:Munich subway DF.jpg
- File:Munich subway station Dülferstraße.jpg
- File:München, U-Bahnhof Dülferstraße, 2.jpeg
Lukas Beck (talk) 16:50, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. When I uploaded the picture Commons already had another picture about this object; so I assumed that for some reason (unknown to me) it was alright to publish such pictures. I took care to take the picture from outside the delimited station area but it was still in the pedestrian underpass, so I agree with Lukas' argument that FoP does not apply here. –– Renardo la vulpo (talk) 17:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- I only mean my own picture, München, U-Bahnhof Dülferstraße, 2.jpeg. The picture Munich subway station Dülferstraße.jpg might be cropped and kept, as the right half does not show the station's walls. The picture still violates the prohibition to take pictures within Munich metro stations but this does not concern copyright, though it probably applies to hundreds of WC photos. This was the reason why I took my picture from outside the station area. –– Renardo la vulpo (talk) 17:49, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
- This - as well as my other Munich subway pictures tagged for deletion lately - was taken using an official permit by Münchner Verkehrsgesellschaft that included the right to use these pictures afterwards. I am no lawyer but I understand it in a way that allows usage of pictures taken with official permit by domestic authority. --FloSch (talk) 09:13, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- But does the transport company really have copyright claims, or rather the architects? Lukas Beck (talk) 11:33, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
- To my understand yes, but as said, I am no lawyer.
- So instead of bulk-deleting pictures that have been on Commons/Wikipedia for decades, maybe some research would have been in Ordner instead. But please go ahead making Wikipedia a little bit less colorful if that feels right to you. I won‘t intervene here or in the other discussions with your plot here and promise to not upload anything anymore in the future. Good bye and see you elsewhere… No worries, I lost interest in doing that there years ago anyway, this plot here is just another dip on top. --FloSch (talk) 10:48, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
- I don't get emotional by that! Sorry! We have clear rules and one of them is, that when we are unsure about copyright, we should delete the files. And if we ever get further information, all images can be undeleted. But thats not my job. Lukas Beck (talk) 12:17, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
- But does the transport company really have copyright claims, or rather the architects? Lukas Beck (talk) 11:33, 22 June 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, needs VRT permission from the copyright holder since it's not covered by FOP. --Abzeronow (talk) 17:06, 26 October 2023 (UTC)