Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2024/03/18: Difference between revisions
m Bot: Archiving 3 threads from Commons:Deletion requests/2024/03/18 |
m Bot: Archiving 3 threads from Commons:Deletion requests/2024/03/18 |
||
| Line 208: | Line 208: | ||
{{Commons:Deletion requests/File:TW 台灣 Taiwan 台北 Taipei 新東南海鮮料理 Shin Tung Nan Seafood Cuisine Restaurant night March 2024 R12S 105.jpg}} |
{{Commons:Deletion requests/File:TW 台灣 Taiwan 台北 Taipei 新東南海鮮料理 Shin Tung Nan Seafood Cuisine Restaurant night March 2024 R12S 105.jpg}} |
||
{{Commons:Deletion requests/File:TW 台灣 Taiwan 台北 Taipei 永康街 YongKang Street 臺灣茶 beverage tea 玖仰 Jiu Yang March 2024 R12S 01.jpg}} |
{{Commons:Deletion requests/File:TW 台灣 Taiwan 台北 Taipei 永康街 YongKang Street 臺灣茶 beverage tea 玖仰 Jiu Yang March 2024 R12S 01.jpg}} |
||
{{Commons:Deletion requests/File:TW 台灣 Taiwan 台北 Taipei 永康街 YongKang Street 天津蔥抓餅 food shop bag March 2024 R12S.jpg}} |
|||
{{Commons:Deletion requests/File:TW 台灣 Taiwan 台北 Taipei 早晨 morning 餃子店 food restaurant breakfast 自助清潔 March 2024 R12S.jpg}} |
|||
{{Commons:Deletion requests/File:Auerkordeskordes.jpg}} |
|||
Revision as of 20:30, 23 June 2024
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
_-_1967.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_and_-_Mohamed_Hakimi,_Chairman_of_SCER_in_press_conference_on_elections_in_Yemen.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Misunderstanding in backchannel communication - campaign has not agreed to release image into the public domain Bremps... 01:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Campaign has refused to release the image into the public domain, as they don't want a photo of Desvignes and Willis circulating around. They had agreed to release the image into the public domain earlier as a result of a misunderstanding. Bremps... 01:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 09:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Because it is a selfie which is not used in any article Abdulkadir Özhan (talk) 07:03, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept, Nonsense request (the image doesn't show anybody, so clearly not a selfie). --PaterMcFly (talk) 08:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Tolong artikel ini dihapus Kakakhd31 (talk) 08:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
{{subst:Proposed deletion notify|Emblem Of Sundapura Nusantara}} Kakakhd31 (talk) 08:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 09:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
{{subst:Proposed deletion notify|Flag Of Sundapura Nusantara.jpg}} Kakakhd31 (talk) 08:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 09:21, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
anatomy sections 2604:3D08:9885:2800:F890:934F:30DF:8F2C 11:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense request. --Achim55 (talk) 12:06, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Fake logo? (per DMA180guy) Mvcg66b3r (talk) 11:28, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- In what sense? 200.111.17.10 21:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Delete Per Sammi Brie in the ANU complaint. To quote from her, "Recently, they've gone through and removed the NBC peacock from their NBC affiliates (to promote local branding). They haven't done this with the CBS affiliates." So at least from that the uploader jumped the gun by creating, uploading, and adding modified logos to Wikimedia projects when the station themselves either haven't changed their logos yet or don't plan to in the future. The files are also misattributed to the station in the meantime. When in reality they were purely created by the uploader themselves based on their own personal opinion of what the new logos will look like. Whatever the case though there's zero reason we can't wait until the station creates their own modified if they ever do and upload that one when it happens. That's at least a lot better then presenting people a logo in a Wikipedia article that's clearly incorrect. We aren't here to spread disinformation. So the uploader should just reupload the actual logo from an actual source whenever or if ever it's created. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:49, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:50, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Fake logo? (per DMA180guy) Mvcg66b3r (talk) 11:29, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
- Delete Per Sammi Brie in the ANU complaint. To quote from her, "Recently, they've gone through and removed the NBC peacock from their NBC affiliates (to promote local branding). They haven't done this with the CBS affiliates." So at least from that the uploader jumped the gun by creating, uploading, and adding modified logos to Wikimedia projects when the station themselves either haven't changed their logos yet or don't plan to in the future. The files are also misattributed to the station in the meantime. When in reality they were purely created by the uploader themselves based on their own personal opinion of what the new logos will look like. Whatever the case though there's zero reason we can't wait until the station creates their own modified if they ever do and upload that one when it happens. That's at least a lot better then presenting people a logo in a Wikipedia article that's clearly incorrect. We aren't here to spread disinformation. So the uploader should just reupload the actual logo from an actual source whenever or if ever it's created. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:49, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted. (non-admin closure) — doclys (❀) 15:46, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Fake logo? (per DMA180guy) Mvcg66b3r (talk) 11:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
- Delete Per Sammi Brie in the ANU complaint. To quote from her, "Recently, they've gone through and removed the NBC peacock from their NBC affiliates (to promote local branding). They haven't done this with the CBS affiliates." So at least from that the uploader jumped the gun by creating, uploading, and adding modified logos to Wikimedia projects when the station themselves either haven't changed their logos yet or don't plan to in the future. The files are also misattributed to the station in the meantime. When in reality they were purely created by the uploader themselves based on their own personal opinion of what the new logos will look like. Whatever the case though there's zero reason we can't wait until the station creates their own modified if they ever do and upload that one when it happens. That's at least a lot better then presenting people a logo in a Wikipedia article that's clearly incorrect. We aren't here to spread disinformation. So the uploader should just reupload the actual logo from an actual source whenever or if ever it's created. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:50, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted. (non-admin closure) — doclys (❀) 15:44, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Fake logo? (per DMA180guy) Mvcg66b3r (talk) 11:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Per Sammi Brie in the ANU complaint. To quote from her, "Recently, they've gone through and removed the NBC peacock from their NBC affiliates (to promote local branding). They haven't done this with the CBS affiliates." So at least from that the uploader jumped the gun by creating, uploading, and adding modified logos to Wikimedia projects when the station themselves either haven't changed their logos yet or don't plan to in the future. The files are also misattributed to the station in the meantime. When in reality they were purely created by the uploader themselves based on their own personal opinion of what the new logos will look like. Whatever the case though there's zero reason we can't wait until the station creates their own modified if they ever do and upload that one when it happens. That's at least a lot better then presenting people a logo in a Wikipedia article that's clearly incorrect. We aren't here to spread disinformation. So the uploader should just reupload the actual logo from an actual source whenever or if ever it's created. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:50, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted. (non-admin closure) — doclys (❀) 15:48, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Fake logo? (per DMA180guy) Mvcg66b3r (talk) 11:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Per Sammi Brie in the ANU complaint. To quote from her, "Recently, they've gone through and removed the NBC peacock from their NBC affiliates (to promote local branding). They haven't done this with the CBS affiliates." So at least from that the uploader jumped the gun by creating, uploading, and adding modified logos to Wikimedia projects when the station themselves either haven't changed their logos yet or don't plan to in the future. The files are also misattributed to the station in the meantime. When in reality they were purely created by the uploader themselves based on their own personal opinion of what the new logos will look like. Whatever the case though there's zero reason we can't wait until the station creates their own modified if they ever do and upload that one when it happens. That's at least a lot better then presenting people a logo in a Wikipedia article that's clearly incorrect. We aren't here to spread disinformation. So the uploader should just reupload the actual logo from an actual source whenever or if ever it's created. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:50, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted. (non-admin closure) — doclys (❀) 15:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Fake logo? (per DMA180guy) Mvcg66b3r (talk) 11:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Per Sammi Brie in the ANU complaint. To quote from her, "Recently, they've gone through and removed the NBC peacock from their NBC affiliates (to promote local branding). They haven't done this with the CBS affiliates." So at least from that the uploader jumped the gun by creating, uploading, and adding modified logos to Wikimedia projects when the station themselves either haven't changed their logos yet or don't plan to in the future. The files are also misattributed to the station in the meantime. When in reality they were purely created by the uploader themselves based on their own personal opinion of what the new logos will look like. Whatever the case though there's zero reason we can't wait until the station creates their own modified if they ever do and upload that one when it happens. That's at least a lot better then presenting people a logo in a Wikipedia article that's clearly incorrect. We aren't here to spread disinformation. So the uploader should just reupload the actual logo from an actual source whenever or if ever it's created. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:50, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Fake logo? (per DMA180guy) Mvcg66b3r (talk) 11:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- This is not a fake logo. BMarGlines (talk) 22:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- @BMarGlines: Can you provide the source then? It should be easy to provide one if the logo is real and the file description is correct. --Adamant1 (talk) 15:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Per Sammi Brie in the ANU complaint. To quote from her, "Recently, they've gone through and removed the NBC peacock from their NBC affiliates (to promote local branding). They haven't done this with the CBS affiliates." So at least from that the uploader jumped the gun by creating, uploading, and adding modified logos to Wikimedia projects when the station themselves either haven't changed their logos yet or don't plan to in the future. The files are also misattributed to the station in the meantime. When in reality they were purely created by the uploader themselves based on their own personal opinion of what the new logos will look like. Whatever the case though there's zero reason we can't wait until the station creates their own modified if they ever do and upload that one when it happens. That's at least a lot better then presenting people a logo in a Wikipedia article that's clearly incorrect. We aren't here to spread disinformation. So the uploader should just reupload the actual logo from an actual source whenever or if ever it's created. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; unused logo. --Ankry (talk) 12:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Fake logo? (per DMA180guy) Mvcg66b3r (talk) 11:36, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Per Sammi Brie in the ANU complaint. To quote from her, "Recently, they've gone through and removed the NBC peacock from their NBC affiliates (to promote local branding). They haven't done this with the CBS affiliates." So at least from that the uploader jumped the gun by creating, uploading, and adding modified logos to Wikimedia projects when the station themselves either haven't changed their logos yet or don't plan to in the future. The files are also misattributed to the station in the meantime. When in reality they were purely created by the uploader themselves based on their own personal opinion of what the new logos will look like. Whatever the case though there's zero reason we can't wait until the station creates their own modified if they ever do and upload that one when it happens. That's at least a lot better then presenting people a logo in a Wikipedia article that's clearly incorrect. We aren't here to spread disinformation. So the uploader should just reupload the actual logo from an actual source whenever or if ever it's created. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted by Bedivere. (non-admin closure) — doclys (❀) 15:42, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Fake logo? (per Sammi Brie) Mvcg66b3r (talk) 12:11, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Per Sammi Brie in the ANU complaint. To quote from her, "Recently, they've gone through and removed the NBC peacock from their NBC affiliates (to promote local branding). They haven't done this with the CBS affiliates." So at least from that the uploader jumped the gun by creating, uploading, and adding modified logos to Wikimedia projects when the station themselves either haven't changed their logos yet or don't plan to in the future. The files are also misattributed to the station in the meantime. When in reality they were purely created by the uploader themselves based on their own personal opinion of what the new logos will look like. Whatever the case though there's zero reason we can't wait until the station creates their own modified if they ever do and upload that one when it happens. That's at least a lot better then presenting people a logo in a Wikipedia article that's clearly incorrect. We aren't here to spread disinformation. So the uploader should just reupload the actual logo from an actual source whenever or if ever it's created. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:50, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
es incoprrecto Brandonq12 (talk) 19:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: Own userspace. --Achim55 (talk) 19:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by org, no usage and out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 21:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:58, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
COM:SPAM, multiple promo images uploaded by presumed company rep, no usage and out of scope
Gnomingstuff (talk) 21:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Not appropriate Nikhildarekar07 (talk) 21:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 21:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Please delete as soon as possible. There is no permission or a CC-license for this picture. The photographer Toni Ott has send me an email. Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Speedy delete all. Next time, please don't upload anything that is not either photographed by you, already specified as being suitably licensed on another page or public domain. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:33, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 08:41, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Please delete as soon as possible. There is no permission or a CC-license for this picture. The photographer Toni Ott has send me an email. Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 08:41, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Koenig_-_Kleine_Kugelkaryatide_V,_1._Entwurf_-_1968.png Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Please delete as soon as possible. There is no permission or a CC-license for this picture. The photographer Toni Ott has send me an email. Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 08:41, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Koenig_-_Kleine_S%C3%A4ulenkaryatide_B_-_1968.png Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:50, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Please delete as soon as possible. There is no permission or a CC-license for this picture. The photographer Toni Ott has send me an email. Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 08:41, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
_-_1967.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Koenig_-_Kleine_S%C3%A4ulenkaryatide_B_-_1968.png Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:50, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
_-_1967.jpg){kind=link}
Please delete as soon as possible. There is no permission or a CC-license for this picture. The photographer Toni Ott has send me an email. Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
_-_1967.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 08:40, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
_-_1967.jpg){kind=link}
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fritz_Koenig_-_Kleine_S%C3%A4ulenkaryatide_B_-_1968.png Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:50, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Please delete as soon as possible. There is no permission or a CC-license for this picture. The photographer Toni Ott has send me an email. Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 08:40, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Please delete as soon as possible. There is no permission or a CC-license for this picture. The photographer Toni Ott has send me an email. Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 08:40, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Please delete as soon as possible. There is no permission or a CC-license for this picture. The photographer Toni Ott has send me an email. Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 08:40, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Please delete as soon as possible. There is no permission or a CC-license for this picture. The photographer Toni Ott has send me an email. Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 08:40, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Please delete as soon as possible. There is no permission or a CC-license for this picture. The photographer Toni Ott has send me an email. Tocquevillosia (talk) 14:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: as requested by the uploader shortly after upload. --Rosenzweig τ 08:39, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Same file as this one. The Newer version was uploaded over the old one. باسم (talk) 16:42, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- @باسم I fail to see any justification for nominating my file for deletion. The superseded template specifically caters to such cases, or alternatively, seeking permission before I uploaded my own version would have been appropriate. Directly requesting the file's deletion reflects a lack of respect. Regards Riad Salih (talk) 17:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: alread deleted by Túrelio. --Rosenzweig τ 08:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
No freedom of Panorama in Russia Altenmann (talk) 18:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, withdrawn; there is FOP for buildings. Altenmann (talk) 18:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: nomination was withdrawn. --Rosenzweig τ 08:35, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
No Freedom of Panorama in Russia Altenmann (talk) 18:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, withdrawn; there is FOP for buildings. Altenmann (talk) 18:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: nomination was withdrawn. --Rosenzweig τ 08:35, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Lo subí por equivocación Darian Italyetzi (talk) 23:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: Own userspace. --Achim55 (talk) 08:03, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in USA. VRT permission is required to proof that statement A1Cafel (talk) 06:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Do not Delete. US has FOP for Public Interiors. This 2D art is a permanent exhibit at a National Historic Site. It has been donated to the public and derivative works are permitted.
- Documentation has been forwarded to [email protected]. Netmouse (talk) 11:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Ticket:2024031910013043 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 15:00, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 16:23, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
This file contains location information that needs to be removed. I already uploaded File:USANewImmigrantGuide.jpg to replace it (also fixed articles linking to it). HellcatSRT (talk) 18:11, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Note: I requested speedy deletion (G7) instead. HellcatSRT (talk) 02:24, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 07:55, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by HellcatSRT as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G7 Yann (talk) 07:54, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 07:55, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
I am the author/uploader of this file. This file unexpectedly contains GPS coordinates in its EXIF, which is not relevant and not needed. I created and reuploaded File:USANewImmigrantGuide.jpg to remove that data. This (old) file is no longer needed.
P.S. In the previous nomication, I wrongly thought I could do speedy deletion for my own file (I didn't notice that SD G7 only allows speedy deletion within 7 days after the file uploading), so I crossed out it and requested speedy deletion instead. HellcatSRT (talk) 05:58, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Duplicate of File:USANewImmigrantGuide.jpg. --Yann (talk) 10:08, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Files uploaded by PuroSchmidt (talk · contribs)
fantasy diagrams are out of project scope
- File:Schmidt Germany Bundestag 2025.svg
- File:Germany Alternative caucus Parliament 2024.svg
- File:Germany Alternative Bundestag 2024.svg
Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 12:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:02, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Files uploaded by PuroSchmidt (talk · contribs)
fake data, misleading diagrams : not the actual composition of the Hong Kong LegCo elected in 2012, not the number of seats of the South African Senate in 1979...
- File:Hong Kong Parliament 2014.svg
- File:Afrikaner Volksraad 1982.svg
- File:Afrikaner Fictional Volksraad 1983.svg
- File:Afrikaner Fixed Senaat 1979.svg
- File:Afrikaner Senaat 1979.svg
- File:Schmidt Germany Bundestag 2025.svg
- File:Germany Alternative caucus Parliament 2024.svg
- File:Germany Alternative Bundestag 2024.svg
Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 10:17, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:03, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Files uploaded by PuroSchmidt (talk · contribs)
These images are for a hoax/made-up/fictional legislative election. Outside of Commons scope to host personal fantasy election results.
- File:Republic of China Fictional Legislative Yuan 2022.svg
- File:Republic of China Total seats Legislative Yuan 2024.svg
- File:Republic of China Fictional Legislative Yuan 2020.svg
Whpq (talk) 11:46, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 09:31, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Files in Category:Gisela Achterberg
copyright violation; works by living artist; no freedom of panorama.
- File:Gisela Achterberg 2024.jpg
- File:Gisela Achterberg Buchuebermalung Alles Schweine 1998.jpg
- File:Gisela Achterberg F III, 2001.jpg
- File:Gisela Achterberg Fleissige Symbole 2022.JPG
- File:Gisela Achterberg Hindurchgeschluepft 2000.JPG
- File:Gisela Achterberg Kalenderuebermalung 6 Woche 2015.JPG
- File:Gisela Achterberg Nutzlose Maßnahme 2000.jpg
- File:Gisela Achterberg Skulpturen 1999.jpg
- File:Gisela Achterberg Spielerischer Bauplan 1991.JPG
- File:Gisela Achterberg Stadtrandnotiz 1994.JPG
- File:Gisela Achterberg Sture Unterhaltung zu dritt 1990.JPG
- File:Gisela Achterberg Szenen einer Ehe 1994.JPG
- File:Gisela Achterberg Transport von Rot 1993.JPG
- File:Gisela Achterberg Zeichnung 1997.jpg
- File:Gisela Achterberg Zeichnung Collage 2008.jpg
Martin Sg. (talk) 13:16, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ticket:2024031810008641 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 16:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep per Krdbot.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 20:58, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
- Bot is not a person. Only informs reception, not acceptance. 186.175.147.139 02:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket permission. --Krd 17:27, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep was nominated for speedy deletion but its just a vectorised version of a photo on commons thats released CC 4.0 TheLoyalOrder (talk) 22:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Recreation of logo that has VRT confirmed permission.
- Seawolf35 (talk) 18:59, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --shizhao (talk) 02:31, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in the Philippines A1Cafel (talk) 06:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:11, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in the Philippines A1Cafel (talk) 06:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:11, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in the Philippines A1Cafel (talk) 06:39, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:11, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 06:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:11, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 06:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:11, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Missing permission for shown artwork Wdwd (talk) 09:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
AI-generated image of fictional person, no educational value. 0x0a (talk) 10:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Non-free logo. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
image uploaded by a banned user was never reviewed and now the flickr source is deleted. Since image is unused, it may be better to delete. Leoboudv (talk) 20:11, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 05:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
copyvio; stained glass windows by Oetken (d. 1998) / Wallner (d. 1979), no freedom of panorama.
- File:Hamburgo St. Petri 06.jpg
- File:Hamburg (40288694922).jpg
- File:St. Petri HH Kirchenfenster.jpg
- File:Hamburgo St. Petri 02.jpg
- File:Kirche089.JPG
- File:St. Petri Hamburg Altarraum2018.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Martin Sg. (talk) 20:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --FitIndia Semi-retired 08:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Exceptionally low quality AI image - significant errors with text, flags, clothing/items, etc. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 02:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm fairly certain the image generator tried to depict en:Trompenaars's model of national culture differences as a literal model of cultural differences (in the same sense as a model airplane). This is, of course, completely useless; literally no aspect of this abstract model is visible in the image. Omphalographer (talk) 03:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 13:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Er staan grammaticale fouten in Verloren16 (talk) 09:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Text files not in use are out of COM:SCOPE. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --IronGargoyle (talk) 13:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Copyrighted map in Taiwan. Solomon203 (talk) 11:11, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 13:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Copyrighted map in Taiwan. Solomon203 (talk) 11:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 13:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Copyrighted map in Taiwan. Solomon203 (talk) 11:13, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 13:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Copyrighted map in Taiwan. Solomon203 (talk) 11:14, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 13:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Copyrighted map in Taiwan. Solomon203 (talk) 11:15, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 13:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Copyrighted map in Taiwan. Solomon203 (talk) 11:16, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 13:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
File:Beach time effect KP (13456977075).jpg with some extra text. Redundant. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - contributions} 17:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep. Documents state ad campaign, no? - Jmabel ! talk 18:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: Per Jmabel. --IronGargoyle (talk) 13:44, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
I uploaded this image for a project on Wikibooks, but on reconsideration I no longer need the image and it can be deleted. S. Perquin (talk) 17:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- Keep For others to sue. --RAN (talk) 00:23, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, in use in project space. --IronGargoyle (talk) 13:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
I uploaded this image for a project on Wikibooks, but on reconsideration I no longer need the image and it can be deleted. S. Perquin (talk) 17:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- Keep For others to use. --RAN (talk) 00:25, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: Per RAN. --IronGargoyle (talk) 13:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Files uploaded by Selasserre (talk · contribs)
COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by presumed company rep, no usage and out of scope
Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:10, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
COM:SPAM and COM:NOTWEBHOST Seawolf35 (talk) 18:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Image quality, file name, and file format all suggest this is a social media image and not the uploader's work. It seems to be a different image from the one that used the same file name previously though Adeletron 3030 (talk) 18:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Out of scope and use, personal file used in soon to be deleted page on EnWiki. Seawolf35 (talk) 18:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:19, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
COM:NOTWEBHOST and out of scope Seawolf35 (talk) 19:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per nominator. - THV | ♂ | U | T - 00:19, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:19, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Unused personal file, out of scope Seawolf35 (talk) 19:03, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal file Seawolf35 (talk) 19:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Absolutely useless Seawolf35 (talk) 19:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Out of scope material (?). 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 20:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Not a selfie, in any case. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:18, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:17, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company, no usage and out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal file Seawolf35 (talk) 22:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Siboshvili (talk · contribs)
COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by presumed company rep, no usage and out of scope
Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:15, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Unused personal image, out of project scope. Nanahuatl (talk) 23:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:15, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
appears to be personal/joke logo ("stonks"); out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 23:42, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Clara infracción de derechos de autor (https://www.diarioelnorte.com.ar/juan-maria-traverso-vive-dias-de-reconocimientos/) XxAlanEZExX (talk) 01:11, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: no evidence of a free license at source. --Strakhov (talk) 22:02, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
File titled "WhatsApp image" ⲔⲖⲞⲢⲠⲒⲔⲢⲒⲚ (talk) 02:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - COM:PCP. We still have file:File:Paraffin wax.jpg which can be used instead. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 02:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Comment It's a broken glass in NovaFaol from Nova Friburgo bus station. Maybe it can be deleted because copyrighted problem from governant of Rio de Janeiro's state government. --Vitorperrut555 (talk) 20:13, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Copyrighted character, unlikely to be uploader's work A1Cafel (talk) 02:50, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
I'm very sorry, this was posted by me, but I did not notice that CDs are not allowed to be posted. Therefore, I hope to request the deletion of the content I posted myself. However, because I'm not very familiar with how to operate, I am making the request here. Rogerchang1133 (talk) 03:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:53, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Poor quality still images from Flickr video, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 03:51, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:53, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Large opaque borders. Have File:Cyclohexanol acsv.svg among several alternatives in Category:Cyclohexanol. DMacks (talk) 03:55, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 19:23, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:53, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Out-of-focus and inconsistent geometry; have several high quality alts in Category:1,3-Dichlorobenzene DMacks (talk) 03:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Also:
- File:1,3-Chlorobenzene structure.png (and its File:Screen Shot 60.png redirect)
that is a dup of it. DMacks (talk) 03:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete both files per nom. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 07:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, {{BadJPG}}. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 18:00, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Uneven weight, with large opaque margins. Have a bunch of high-quality alts in Category:Benzaldehyde DMacks (talk) 03:58, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
And likewise:
- File:Benzaldehyde Structure.png (and the File:Screen Shot 37.png redirect to it)
DMacks (talk) 04:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, {{BadJPG}}. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 18:00, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete both files per nom. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 15:48, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Uneven geometry. Have a bunch of alts in Category:Toluene. DMacks (talk) 03:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, {{BadJPG}}. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 18:00, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 15:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
This flag is hoax, not existant, completely made up. The description says about "communist panamanians" but doesn't have sources. Taichi (talk) 04:23, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
This flag is hoax, not existant, completely made up. Taichi (talk) 04:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Out of scope: plain text. If you are trying to add an article to Wikipedia, please read en:Help:Your first article. Omphalographer (talk) 04:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Extremely small and unused image, also the watermark is distracting that affects the usage of this photo A1Cafel (talk) 04:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Já existe outro arquivo semelhante na Wikimedia com o mesmo nome Vini1980 (talk) 06:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- COM:INUSE. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Translation: "There is no other similar file on Wikimedia with the same name" --RAN (talk) 13:21, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep No valid reason. --RAN (talk) 13:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- How can you translate a language about which you have no idea?! The sentence says just the opposite. Por Dios! 186.175.91.65 18:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
"There exists another similar file on Wikimedia with the same name": File:Retrato de Maria Perpétua.png. --Achim55 (talk) 18:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Bravo! 👏 The real problem here is one person is uploading many pictures of the same witch, under several user names, and then asking deletion, under several other user names, all in red (like blood). It is either the witch herself or a child... 186.175.91.65 19:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Esse ficheiro já existe em outra página da Wikimédia Vini1980 (talk) 14:20, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Ficheiro já existente em outra página da Wikimédia Commons Vini1980 (talk) 17:03, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: This one looks significantly better than File:Retrato em miniatura de Maria Perpétua Calafate de Souza.jpg. --Achim55 (talk) 18:48, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Strakhov (talk) 22:10, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
JA existe um arquivo semelhante Vini1980 (talk) 04:18, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept. No new arguments here. I blocked the nominator for edit warring after warnings. Taivo (talk) 10:15, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Foi eu quem carregou esse ficheiro , e já existe um semelhante. Estou tendo problemas com os direitos autorais e por isso preciso que ele seja eliminado por favor 170.238.199.31 03:28, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense request. An 1815 image is out of copyright. --Achim55 (talk) 18:12, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Deleted per ticket:2024041010011792. --Krd 14:02, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
Random penis photo, poor composition, act as exhibitionism A1Cafel (talk) 07:09, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:06, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Unused personal photo. Solomon203 (talk) 12:14, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep in use on user page, dosen't seem to be a "personal photo", properly categorized. I don't see an issue with this image. TheImaCow (talk) 19:39, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: not "personal", depiction of a metro station in Taipei. --Strakhov (talk) 22:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Out of scope: Conspiracy theory that "Africa is a lie" Enyavar (talk) 13:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope, fantasy map. --Strakhov (talk) 22:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Low-quality chemical structure with opaque (white) background and fully pixelated. Also delete the its redirect File:Screen Shot 11.png. Replaced by File:Benzamide 200.svg as high-quality vector version. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 19:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 22:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Copyright violation from - https://sinarmas.com/ceritasm/index.php/2023/12/04/menilik-keindahan-masjid-apung-ziyadatul-abrar-persembahan-csr-pt-borneo-indobara/ Exagren (talk) 03:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:00, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Cipkanikolaj (talk · contribs)
useless test files, out of project scope
- File:Confederacy of Terra Milky Way Senate 2230.svg
- File:Confederacy of Terra Milky Way Congress 2230.svg
Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 08:15, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:01, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
No FOP for artwork, including sculptures in the Russia. 0x0a (talk) 11:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:03, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
These are all pretty generic and there are already plenty of examples in their respective categories
The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 02:11, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, but in "Red heart pulse" there is an animation of the heart beating. Буквы (talk) 12:50, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep File:Five-pointed yellow star.svg and File:Five-pointed red star.svg have a border absent from the others in the category. File:Red heart pulse.svg pulses. --RAN (talk) 16:57, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion; no consensus to delete. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Own work? 186.174.67.25 02:21, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Why does this say Deletion request? This is my own work. I took this photo on the SUU campus in Cedar City, Utah with my own camera on December 31, 2023. This is the Eccles Coliseum from the West side parking lot. This photo should definitely be kept. Yotejonga (talk) 23:06, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Own work? 186.174.67.25 02:21, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Why does this say Deletion request? This is my own work. I took this photo in Enterprise, Utah with my own camera on December 31, 2023. I was visiting my family there for the holidays. Enterprise is where I am from. I have personally climbed up inside those grain towers. They are a block from my childhood home. This photo should definitely be kept. Yotejonga (talk) 23:07, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Comfop ? 186.174.67.25 02:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Why does this say Deletion request? This is my own work. I just took this photo on the SUU campus in Cedar City, Utah with my own camera this last Thursday afternoon. Yotejonga (talk) 02:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yotejonga, the potential problem is that there is no freedom of panorama for statues in the U.S. Do you know when the sculptor died (if they did)? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:51, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Jerry Anderson is the sculptor of "Old Sorrel". He made the statue in 1986. Jerry was born in Las Vegas, NV in 1935; therefore, he is 88 or 89 years old. It appears that he is still hanging on and living in Silver Reef, UT (Southern Utah), which is a ghost of a mining town. Yotejonga (talk) 22:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Thanks for the info. Ergo, this photo must be deleted. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:35, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yotejonga, the potential problem is that there is no freedom of panorama for statues in the U.S. Do you know when the sculptor died (if they did)? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:51, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination & discussion; COM:DW of work by living artist, no evidence the artist has authorized free license. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:27, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Own work? 186.174.67.25 02:23, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Any particular reason you doubt the own work claim? --PaterMcFly (talk) 08:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Why does this say Deletion request? This is my own work. I just took this photo on the SUU campus in Cedar City, Utah with my own camera this last Thursday afternoon. I went inside the Eccles Coliseum and took these photos. This photo should definitely be kept. Yotejonga (talk) 23:10, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Own work? 186.174.67.25 02:23, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Why does this say Deletion request? This is my own work. I just took this photo on the SUU campus in Cedar City, Utah with my own camera this last Thursday afternoon. I went inside the Eccles Coliseum and took these photos. This photo should definitely be kept. Yotejonga (talk) 23:11, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Own work? 186.174.67.25 02:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Why does this say Deletion request? This is my own work. I just took this photo on the SUU campus in Cedar City, Utah with my own camera this last Thursday afternoon. I went inside the Eccles Coliseum and took these photos. This photo should definitely be kept. Yotejonga (talk) 23:11, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Own work? 186.174.67.25 02:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Why does this say Deletion request? This is my own work. I just took this photo on the SUU campus in Cedar City, Utah with my own camera this last Thursday afternoon. I went inside the Eccles Coliseum and took these photos. This photo should definitely be kept. Yotejonga (talk) 23:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Own work? 186.174.67.25 02:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Why does this say Deletion request? This is my own work. I just took this photo on the SUU campus in Cedar City, Utah with my own camera this last Thursday afternoon. I went inside the Eccles Coliseum and took these photos. This photo should definitely be kept. Yotejonga (talk) 23:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Own work? Not time for a block? 186.174.67.25 02:28, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Why does this say Deletion request? This is my own work. I just took this photo on the SUU campus in Cedar City, Utah with my own camera this last Thursday afternoon. I went inside the Eccles Coliseum and took these photos. This photo should definitely be kept. Yotejonga (talk) 23:13, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Own work? 186.174.67.25 02:28, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Why does this say Deletion request? This is my own work. I just took this photo on the SUU campus in Cedar City, Utah with my own camera this last Thursday afternoon. I went inside the Eccles Coliseum and took these photos. This photo should definitely be kept. Yotejonga (talk) 23:14, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Own work? 186.174.67.25 02:29, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Why does this say Deletion request? This is my own work. I just took this photo on the SUU campus in Cedar City, Utah with my own camera this last Thursday afternoon. I went inside the Eccles Coliseum and took these photos. This photo should definitely be kept. Yotejonga (talk) 23:14, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Is it FOP? 186.174.67.25 02:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:DW of work by modern artist, still under copyright. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Watermark is too destructive that affects the usage of the photo A1Cafel (talk) 05:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. This image is unusual and has historic value. It is within project scope per COM:OOS. A Watermark alone, should not be used a reason for deleting a file. A watermark tag is sufficient. --Ooligan (talk) 06:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Per COM:WATERMARK, destructive watermarks are not allowed on Commons. --A1Cafel (talk) 11:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Ooligan What's the historic value of this image? An improved description (preferably in english) would help. PaterMcFly (talk) 12:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- @PaterMcFly, this worn button looks like it is from a public email kiosk, where people could write and send emails for a fee. It was for people that didn't have a computer at home and before the iPhone.
- So, if there is ever a better version,as the "watermark" tag says, "The usage of visible watermarks is discouraged. If a non-watermarked version of the image is available, please upload it under the same file name and then remove this template"
- And yes, this file needs a new name which I can do after this file is saved from deletion. Thanks, --Ooligan (talk) 15:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- @A1Cafel, From COM:WATERMARK,
- "Images with unacceptable and discouraged watermarks may be tagged with {{Watermark}}. If an unacceptable watermark is removed, the information it contains shall be transferred to the file description page.
- The actual written words on this page are "not acceptable"- where you wrote "not allowed." The file has been tagged properly.
- @A1Cafel, From COM:WATERMARK,
- This file can have the watermark removed successfully with the clear gold lines and simple green background. This file is still valuable, because it is a rare example of a time between the introduction of email and the advent of smart phones.
- Also, the "Watermarks" link is not policy. It says,
- "This page is a proposed Commons guideline, policy, or process.The proposal may still be in development, under discussion, or in the process of gathering consensus for adoption. References or links to this page should not describe it as "policy"." --Ooligan (talk) 16:13, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Also, the "Watermarks" link is not policy. It says,
- @Ooligan What's the historic value of this image? An improved description (preferably in english) would help. PaterMcFly (talk) 12:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Per COM:WATERMARK, destructive watermarks are not allowed on Commons. --A1Cafel (talk) 11:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no consensus to delete. Watermarks are discouraged but not by themselves reason for deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:31, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Prof Marek Gosztyła MJanda1905 (talk) 07:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep What's wrong with the image? PaterMcFly (talk) 08:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Studio photo, see source, author and original date (2005). 186.173.241.61 03:58, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:07, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
Fatansy diagrams are out of project scope. This diagram does not match with the actual results of the 1924 elections. Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 10:28, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
not an own work, screenshot of a tv program PizzaKing13 (talk) 22:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 09:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Is it FOP? 186.174.67.25 02:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:DW. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:27, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
This is a 7 month upload from August 2023 and the image was not found at the source by the flickrbot at the time of upload. It may be safer to delete here. Leoboudv (talk) 09:43, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: The flickrbot also did not indicate any license for the source at the time of upload. --Leoboudv (talk) 09:44, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ados, ezabatu eta lixto! = OK, delete it and that's it. Kaletrosa (talk) 12:13, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination & discussion. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:29, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
There is no freedom of panorama for 2D works (please see COM:FOP Canada), meaning graphic works like book covers are considered copyrighted even when they’re photographed in public. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 11:39, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:DW; Jan Brett is living author so not out of copyright. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:30, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Because the information included is not correct Irokraft (talk) 15:54, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept (non-admin closure). Not a valid reason for deletion, appart from the fact that the rationale is not applicable to this image. --PaterMcFly (talk) 11:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
The info about the owner of the book is not correct. The indicated person does not own that copy of the book. Irokraft (talk) 13:14, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Vandalism? The page is messed up, but it's a photo of likely public domain pages. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:37, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Not a valid reason for deletion. The owner of the book is completely irrelevant with respect to copyright. PaterMcFly (talk) 13:14, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. If information is incorrect about a public domain work, it can be corrected, not a deletion issue. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:42, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Estonian Women.jpg is not own work.
Other files are not in use and seem to be personal artwork. Out of scope
- File:Estonian Women.jpg
- File:Labrys Lesbian Feminist Flag.jpg
- File:Lesbian Pride Flag of 2023.jpg
- File:Lesbian Pride Flag 2023.jpg
- File:Labrys Lesbian FlagX1.jpg
Estopedist1 (talk) 13:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:45, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Out of scope: Personal alteration of a "potential superpowers" file (with RF removed). Contentious PoV in any case; unused. Enyavar (talk) 14:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Out of scope, blurry unused image Seawolf35 (talk) 14:27, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Person died in august 2013, age 63. Can not be own work of september 2013. Original date? Author? Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 14:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:48, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Out of scope and use, likely personal photo. Seawolf35 (talk) 15:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Copyrighted map in Taiwan. Solomon203 (talk) 13:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: by krd. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:53, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
I uploaded this image for a project on Wikibooks, but on reconsideration I no longer need the image and it can be deleted. S. Perquin (talk) 17:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Possible copyvio: Doubt on the own work claim, already on the internet in 2008 according to TinEye CoffeeEngineer (talk) 17:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: Music album cover CoffeeEngineer (talk) 17:58, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: A watermark appears on the picture, From Facebook, The uploader is not the author, as per the metadata CoffeeEngineer (talk) 18:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: From Facebook CoffeeEngineer (talk) 18:03, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: A watermark appears on the picture, From Facebook, The uploader is not the author, as per the metadata CoffeeEngineer (talk) 18:03, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: A watermark appears on the picture, From Facebook, The uploader is not the author, as per the metadata CoffeeEngineer (talk) 18:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal file Seawolf35 (talk) 19:06, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal file Seawolf35 (talk) 19:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: The models are marked as the authors (Aaron and Icarus) CoffeeEngineer (talk) 19:43, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Uploaded for vandalism Drakosh (talk) 19:44, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
not an file Drakosh (talk) 19:45, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Clearly copyrighted work from the legend. Ђидо (talk) 19:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Duplikat av Smiestien 8, Hallingby i Ringerike.jpg Ssu (talk) 20:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Deleted the other (newer) file. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Duplikat av Smiestien 9, Hallingby i Ringerike.jpg Ssu (talk) 20:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Deleted the other (newer) file. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
very different images claimed to be the author, which for some is definitely not true. For the historic pictures, most of them are anyway already on commons (like https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:RIAN_archive_543_A_battalion_commander.jpg) For the rest, I doubt we can trust the uploader.
- File:Oleksij Jeremenko.Khoroshe.jpg
- File:Switzerland Fribourg.jpg
- File:Immagine WhatsApp 2024-01-26 ore 14.42.21 6ff2f119.jpg
- File:Ypres 17 October1917.jpg
- File:British Barrage North Africa 1942.E14638.jpg
- File:Barrage during ypres.jpg
- File:Passo Stelvio da Bormio.jpg
- File:Passo Stelvio da Prato.gif
- File:1473753779830.jpg--twa volo 800.jpg
- File:No-step.jpg
- File:92237802 622c1fca-4c13-4d1e-9b0e-e9f3c82b5da9.jpg
- File:4299519 1044 airbus.jpg
- File:Ojmjakon-poljus-holoda-3.jpg
- File:Panavia.AerialRefuelling.Tornado.webp
- File:P51mustang.cockpit.jpg
- File:C.27J.Spartan.jpg
- File:AirCraft.jpg
- File:MIG-35 ANTIGO mig35.jpg
- File:S -sara-thomas-s-ssli-il-nuovo-capo-dell-esercito-iklt.webp
- File:Battle.of.berlin.jpg
Avron (talk) 21:17, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
What is this map for/what does it even is for? V.B.Speranza (talk) 21:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete It's nonsense, maybe even vandalism. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:16, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
What does this map mean/was is it for? V.B.Speranza (talk) 21:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 21:39, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Out of scope: world map, randomly highlighting parts of some countries. Enyavar (talk) 21:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
COM:SPAM -- self promotional images, no usage and out of scope
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Gnomingstuff (talk) 23:36, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:57, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Not a free image. Taken from https://www.dioptra.gr/suggrafeas/panagiotis-dimakis/ Αρκάς (talk) 18 March 2024
Deleted: by Túrelio. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:57, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
Good image, but small file without EXIF. Is it really an own work? 200.111.17.10 21:23, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Note that "small file without EXIF" is expressly stated on COM:DR not to be a deletion reason by itself. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 11:42, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 17:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Ezarateesteban 19:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Almost certainly a copyvio, this artistic work was created far too recently to have entered the public domain. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:299B:4AB:ACA4:28AA 01:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- You are declaring things just by supposition. In the art worlds there are things that are made by request. I do not see your point. Denni045 (talk) 14:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- There is no evidence of permissions or release under a compatible license, you are the one requiring supposition. When in doubt we remove, this is the essence of the precautionary principle under which we operate. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:9CB3:F849:5062:30B9 16:39, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: 2021 artwork; per COM:FOP Japan. --Yasu (talk) 15:15, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama for artistic works in Japan which likely makes this a copyvio. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:299B:4AB:ACA4:28AA 01:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- This artwork was gifted by the artist to the temple and is exposed inside the temple territory. The temple holders as well as the artist are aware of this image and agree on its post on wikipedia. Please do not make false accusations without any proofs. Denni045 (talk) 14:08, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- There is no evidence of any permissions. Unless you can show that the copyright was transferred to the temple and that they have released the image under an appropriate license, the image cannot remain. Commons, and Wikipedia do not allow licenses that only permit display on Wikipedia. And again read about how FoP works in Japan and realize that when in doubt we operate under the precautionary principle. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:9CB3:F849:5062:30B9 16:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete without evidence that the sculptor transferred copyright to the temple and @Denni045 had commercial Creative Commons license permit from whoever is the copyright holder (the sculptor or the temple), this image cannot be kept as violating sculptor's copyright. Thousands of Japanese monuments have been removed from Wikimedia Commons due to the Japanese copyright law not allowing commercial Freedom of Panorama for public art, so this case is already normal here and is not a unique case. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:18, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- The thing that is needed is something that proof the copyright has been transfered from the sculptor to the one who posted the image for the copyrights of the image? Denni045 (talk) 01:22, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Could either be {{De minimis}} or blurry it, in case the main topic of this image is unclear? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:34, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: no proof of permission given. --Yasu (talk) 15:18, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
A photo of me was uploaded by panek. I asked him to remove it. no response. I did not agree for my image to be uploaded. Here is the file https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Karolina_safarzy%C5%84ska_7_%C5%9Bl%C4%85ski_festiwal_nauki.jpg Ksafarzy (talk) 11:37, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Now you managed to impress him! The poor guy had to open a deletion request. He says your photo was taken with his camera but doesn't remember (?) how... Note: I avoid writing the final sentence about this story, as it would be striken for fear of witchcraft. 186.175.22.190 11:08, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: Please follow up Commons:Deletion requests/File:Karolina safarzyńska 7 śląski festiwal nauki.jpg. --Achim55 (talk) 18:49, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Allegedly, this photo is not licensed with creative commons, when really it is via the Ameoba Sisters' terms of use. Desmondius (talk) 01:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Note: the nomination is by the uploader, objecting to my speedy-copyvio tag. I'll withdraw that tag for this DR as contesting it. DMacks (talk) 01:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete The video itself has no such claim (by original assertion), but obviously a channel could make a blanket claim at a central place for all their uploads (thanks for this new evidence). However, those Terms of Service appear to be nowhere near cc-by-sa-4.0 or any Commons-acceptable free license. For example, it allows linking/embedding but not downloading and re-hosting of the videos (a free license must allow unrestricted redistribution). It allows internal re-use or deployment in one's own limited audience of some content but not editing or commercial distribution (the "-ND" and "-NC" variants of CC are specifically prohibited on Commons). That page generally talks all about "fair use", but do not define it in a way that is compliant with Commons requirements (the legal concept of "fair use" does not require their consent at all, and but is also specifically prohibited on Commons). Could you point out where an actual CC-BY-SA-4.0 release is made? DMacks (talk) 01:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused text table, should be in wiki-table format if needed, out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:14, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
possible copyvio (c) Andreas Pietsch M2k~dewiki (talk) 01:14, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Possible Copyvio — uploader’s name does not match copyright holder (see metadata) or description. KlausHeide (talk) 08:29, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
possible copyvio @Sabine Hauswirth. M2k~dewiki (talk) 09:17, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
I have uploaded a (sligthly more straight) photo of the same place (File:No Swimming sign in Kryazhevoye.jpg) using my newer account before I realized this one existed and was already here. Since the new one has a better perspective, please let it stay and remove this one. Thank you. Tadusj (talk) 09:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, redundant. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:21, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Birdwolf Anna (talk · contribs)
Artwork of living artist (b. 1989); promo attempt at ro:Utilizator:Birdwolf Anna.
- File:History and identity- "Fragments of ancient history" oil paintings on canvas..jpg
- File:"Alienation at work and therapy through art".jpg
- File:Experimental art therapy project in public space- "Alienation at work and therapy through art".jpg
- File:Imagination and creativity.jpg
- File:Where ist the Imagination? 2023.jpg
- File:Cover Where is the Imagination?.jpg
- File:Cover for the first book.jpg
Gikü (talk) 11:50, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- "Promo attempt" wouldn't be a reason to deletion, but is the photographer also the artist? There's no FOP in Romania, so this needs to be clarified. PaterMcFly (talk) 09:53, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
_and_-_Mohamed_Hakimi,_Chairman_of_SCER_in_press_conference_on_elections_in_Yemen.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Metadata credits Sebastian Villar Adeletron 3030 (talk) 14:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:26, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Out of scope. Anybody can open their browser and see this. Seawolf35 (talk) 17:51, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:27, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Out of scope, low-res, link in description doesn't inspire confidence this is own work. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - contributions} 17:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Support, per nom. Geardona (talk) 18:13, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:27, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
wrong date, wrong author, wrong source, poor quality Xocolatl (talk) 20:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Scaled-down duplicate of File:USS Yorktown (CV-5) Jul1937.jpg, replace uses with that file. --Rosenzweig τ 08:33, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
_Jul1937.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:28, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
No realistic educational use, 4 seconds loop Nutshinou Talk! 21:28, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:28, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Facebook EXIF, and the four other uploads from this user were taken from the web without attribution. Belbury (talk) 21:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:28, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jamesy0627144 (talk · contribs)
out of scope: no longer used test maps
- File:Testwqktmn4.svg
- File:Testwqktmn3.svg
- File:Testwqktmn2.svg
- File:Testwqktmn1.svg
- File:Test8493845.svg
Enyavar (talk) 22:17, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Wrong name written. Honest typing mistake. Crimsonalfred2022 (talk) 22:45, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete Looks like copyright violation to me. Pinterest unknown author as the source? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:33, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
COM:SPAM Seawolf35 (talk) 22:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Fantasy artwork. Supposedly depicts a real ship but the AI image looks nothing like actual photos of ships of that class. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Agree. This is a complete fabrication. There never was a F 206 in the German Navy, and the ship depicted is not one from the F125 class of frigates. This image is not realistically useful for an educational purpose. -- O.Koslowski (talk) 06:53, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
The license of the image is not free of use — Preceding unsigned comment added by PotatoSeed00 (talk • contribs) 09:57, March 18, 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Na Será Max 47.158.17.29 05:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no clear reason for deletion. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:19, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
not own work. VRT-permission from the artist is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:19, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Просто это для моего друга было MAXWARNET (talk) 09:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: courtesy deletion, G7. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
No permission from author Andrey Parkhomenko Venzz (talk) 10:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:23, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Copyright infringement Alfonsxp (talk) 12:55, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Pleae explain, also you other DRs of similar images. --Denniss (talk) 14:51, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep no explanation given. The world map on the bus dosen't have any creative aspect ({{PD-map}}), the lines on the map dosen't either ({{PD-simple}}), and the text/the script style of "Die magische Zoohandlung" falls under {{De minimis}} TheImaCow (talk) 19:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per self-nomination. If uploader says copyvio about own upload, I take it to mean that this is not own work. Besides, this uploader already had many problematic uploads. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:40, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Copyright infringement Alfonsxp (talk) 12:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Pleae explain, also you other DRs of similar images. --Denniss (talk) 14:51, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per self-nomination. If uploader says copyvio about own upload, I take it to mean that this is not own work. Besides, this uploader already had many problematic uploads. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:40, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
I uploaded this image for a project on Wikibooks, but on reconsideration I no longer need the image and it can be deleted. S. Perquin (talk) 17:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep Others may want to use it. That is why we have you release it into the Creative Commons. --RAN (talk) 21:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Kept: could still be useful, as per User:RAN. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
I uploaded this image for a project on Wikibooks, but on reconsideration I no longer need the image and it can be deleted. S. Perquin (talk) 17:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Kept: could still be useful. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
I uploaded this image for a project on Wikibooks, but on reconsideration I no longer need the image and it can be deleted. S. Perquin (talk) 17:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Kept: could still be useful. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
I uploaded this image for a project on Wikibooks, but on reconsideration I no longer need the image and it can be deleted. S. Perquin (talk) 17:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Kept: could still be useful. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
I uploaded this image for a project on Wikibooks, but on reconsideration I no longer need the image and it can be deleted. S. Perquin (talk) 17:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Kept: could still be useful. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
I uploaded this image for a project on Wikibooks, but on reconsideration I no longer need the image and it can be deleted. S. Perquin (talk) 17:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Keep Others may want to use it. That is why we have you release it into the Creative Commons. --RAN (talk) 21:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Kept: could still be useful, as per User:RAN. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
I uploaded this image for a project on Wikibooks, but on reconsideration I no longer need the image and it can be deleted. S. Perquin (talk) 17:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- Keep Others may want to use it in the future. --RAN (talk) 16:48, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: could still be useful, as per User:RAN. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Unlikely to be own work, TinEye has many copies of this image, some dated as early as February 2008. Belbury (talk) 21:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:49, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Josef Newgarden 2003 Indianapolis 500 Winner.jpg
File is the same as "Josef Newgarden 2023 Indy 500 Winner.webp", which had just previously been deleted for copyright --Waluigithewalrus (talk) 20:27, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The nominator Waluigithewalrus did neither add the DR to the file nor did they notify the uploader. I've asked them to do both now. --Rosenzweig τ 08:29, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Credit in EXIF data not matching uploader, needs COM:VRT. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
copyright violation, not PD. from a dead link via EcuRed https://www.ecured.cu/Archivo:Rafael_Menjivar_jpg.jpg PizzaKing13 (talk) 22:08, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
This is a copyvio. 200.111.17.10 22:09, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Credit in EXIF data not matching uploader, needs COM:VRT. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:51, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
not an own from, from El Faro http://elfaro.net/es/201804/el_salvador/21762/Los-turcos-y-el-olor-de-la-berenjena.htm PizzaKing13 (talk) 22:14, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
not an own work, copyright violation, taken from twitter https://twitter.com/jegutierrez06/status/1449214102426030080 PizzaKing13 (talk) 22:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. And even Twitter is obviously not the original source... --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Filename and general appearance seem to indicate this is a stock image; tineye has hits but after 2020 (given date) https://tineye.com/search/28897b468c2d4825dba22f1e536a8fbb9e9fc97b?sort=crawl_date&order=asc&page=1 Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:21, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: taken from Pexels, but uploaded after July 2018, so now with incompatible license. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
copyright violation, not in PD (from 1979–1982), file came from Twitter https://twitter.com/efemeridessv/status/1379155048828129282 PizzaKing13 (talk) 22:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. And even Twitter is obviously not the original source. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Duplikat av Smiestien 11, Hallingby i Ringerike.jpg Ssu (talk) 20:23, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: and redirected as duplicate. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Duplikat av Smiestien 4 og 2 (bak), Hallingby i Ringerike.jpg Ssu (talk) 20:23, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: and redirected as duplicate. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Almost certainly a copyvio, this artistic work was created far too recently to have entered the public domain. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:89A8:7CB0:19B1:AD35 21:58, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Spam warning ⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️ removing Real sculptures photos of Manciniart — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.171.64.1 (talk) 21:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama for artistic works in Italy which likely makes this a copyvio. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:89A8:7CB0:19B1:AD35 22:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Spam warning ⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️⚠️ from Wikipedia unknown account.. removing Manciniart photos — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.171.64.1 (talk) 21:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I do not see that this is spam: The sculpture of Maria with Jesus child seems to be old enough to be in public domain, but the cross is modern, and in fact from Pierluigi Manciniart, see on ART COLLECTION – Pierluigi Manciniart, search for “Cross religion sculpture made of steel. Private international collection. Signed numbered edition 11.” — Speravir – 02:30, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- I don't understand 217.171.64.1's claims that these are spam either, I know that Denni045 landed in hot water on it-wiki for COI editing, but has nothing to do with us. I'd have to go reread the interior vs exterior FoP stuff, but I don't think it matters. Regardless a protected contemporary artwork is the main subject here so this isn't de minimis and can't be solved by cropping. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:C9CF:8FB0:7DC8:8CED 04:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- Important addition: Because this photograph is taken inside (missing) freedom of panorama does not apply here! But nethertheless the crucifix is a modern artwork and therefore protected. — Speravir – 02:47, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
Info @Denni045: I’ve now seen your answer in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rami portofino.jpg. If also this photo is from the artist you could send one permission note for all these photos together. Get in contact with a support team volunteer. — Speravir – 02:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)
- I did not know that, thank you for your advice we will deal with it later Denni045 (talk) 09:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: not own work but screenshot, note the borders. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Неправильное имя файла, надо изменить 217.107.194.24 02:42, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
- Такие файлы должны быть не удалены, а переименованы.
- Such files shouldn’t be deleted but renamed. 217.117.125.83 11:13, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
Kept: Deletion request is not a place for file renaming. Please see COM:RENAME. If one wishes to renominate this file with another policy-based rationale, they are able to do so. I will defer to other administrators to review it. Happy holidays. --Missvain (talk) 18:23, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
устаревшая версия, есть более актуальный Maximal payne (talk) 22:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Superseded by File:Инфографика v3.png. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:05, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Possible copyvio: The uploader is not the author, as per metadata CoffeeEngineer (talk) 23:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:06, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Violation COM:CUR Germany. Maxinvestigator (talk) 11:16, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep The File:Coat of arms of Germany.svg ("Reichsadler") is out of copyright or in its modern form PD as government symbol. While I can't currently find the exact template this one was made of, I still think any changes to older pictures of the eagle are below TOO Germany. PaterMcFly (talk) 12:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: While the Bundesadler as used in the German coat of arms (de:Bundeswappen) is in the public domain, this is not the same drawing/design. It's the work of de:Wolfgang Doehm, who died in 2010. Per COM:CUR Germany, German money is Not OK except for Deutsche Mark bank notes (or if another cause for PD applies, like PD-old, PD-ineligible etc.) This coin reverse is therefore not yet in the public domain in Germany. The file can be restored in 2081. --Rosenzweig τ 19:09, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Not CC0; poor quality for an SVG Mvcg66b3r (talk) 02:54, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
- Must convert into PNG BMarGlines (talk) 02:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Useful, and there's no requirement to convert this into a PNG. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:44, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted. (non-admin closure) — doclys (❀) 15:43, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Not CC0; may be above COM:TOO; properly licensed logo uploaded locally at Wikipedia Mvcg66b3r (talk) 02:07, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete But I would keep if a simpler version (without the shading) replaces this version. Bedivere (talk) 02:13, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per COM:TOO US. The uncopyrightable Nikon logo is as complex or more complex. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:47, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted. (non-admin closure) — doclys (❀) 15:47, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Not CC0; may be above COM:TOO; properly licensed logo uploaded locally at Wikipedia Mvcg66b3r (talk) 02:20, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted. (non-admin closure) — doclys (❀) 15:49, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
This is image of me. The picture was taken and uploaded without my permission violating the EU policies. 2A02:A319:823E:880:110D:E834:BAB1:5B9E 13:30, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- We pay a shit of attention to EU policies. (What does this mean by the way: Rules? Laws? Dictatorship?) If you don't want to be photographed stay home and close the curtains. KEEP. 186.173.161.35 20:54, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
- There's no need to be uncivil. FPTI (talk) 20:53, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
- Being a university lecturer you are a public person. If this photo showed your appearance in somehow unfavourable way, it would be a point to start a discussion. In my opinion this photo is neutral - you are a scholar doing the scholar's stuff. Panek (talk) 13:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Again: Wikimedia Commons is for free licensed images only, and sometimes the only free licened images of someone notable we have are midling snapshots. Notable people are very welcome to have better photos they like uploaded under free license (if the photographer is not the one uploding, needs explicit permission to share under a free license). Cheers. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:05, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion; subject was in a public place with no expectation of privacy. If you don't like the photo, please consider uploading one that you approve of. —holly {chat} 19:47, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
unclear copyright status Panek (talk) 13:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- You uploaded it, Panek, with the comment "Uploaded own work with UploadWizard"! Who's the author? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:39, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- It was shot with my camera, but actually I don't recall taking it. Probably it was made by my friend. However, it's hard to determine it now. So, the authorship is not clear. Panek (talk) 07:28, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, if you can't remember who shot it, I do think it has to be deleted. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:03, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
P.S. Maybe it's the famous photographer ape that you discussed a lot about. Now I don't remember, in that case who is the author, the ape or the owner of the camera? 186.175.22.190 11:20, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- It was actually a monkey - as I remember, a macaque, who produced a selfie by hitting the shutter. The camera's owner was ruled not to have copyright over the photo, since he didn't shoot it, but since the monkey is not a person, neither was the monkey awarded copyright, and thus, the decision was that the work is in the public domain. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:45, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Panek: Do not remove information and categories from an image page while a deletion discussion is open. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:35, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This seems strange to me that these claims are made by the uploader months later, after a previous deletion request was denied. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 21:35, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: per previous keep. --Gbawden (talk) 14:14, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
This image presents me. I never agreed to make it public. The author does not respond to my request to take it down. I am trying to have this image removed already few months. Ksafarzy (talk) 08:23, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment You were in public, were you not? I think you're out of luck. I don't think you or I have the right to tell people they can't photograph us while we're appearing in public and can't post the photo. If that's wrong, you should cite Polish law instead of repeatedly demanding a takedown, thinking you'll succeed by wearing down Commons, when that won't happen if there's no legal reason to necessitate it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:40, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- because it is image of me, distributed without my permission online Ksafarzy (talk) 13:40, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Ksafarzy: Comment The request for deletion listing is still open, there is no need to relist it repeatedly while discussion is open. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:48, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Ksafarzy: Comment Also I again encourage submitting a better image(s) under a free license as the best way for notable people to avoid having mediocre snapshots of them used on Wikipedia. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Ksafarzy:
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 09:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
There is no freedom of panorama in France, and photographs of 3D sculptures, including trophies, are considered copyrighted.
- File:International Women's Day- Give girls role models to overcome obstacles - 53594383322.jpg
- File:International Women's Day- Give girls role models to overcome obstacles - 53595577549.jpg
- File:International Women's Day- Give girls role models to overcome obstacles.jpg
Adeletron 3030 (talk) 14:55, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 14:14, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 185.172.241.184 as Logo: COM:TOO argument possible here —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - contributions} 16:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Logo above COM:TOO. Michalg95 (talk) 10:23, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 00:28, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
unfree material from Visual Concept Entertainment, license washing Mateus2019 (talk) 20:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Original archival footage depicted was originally created & archived by members of U.S Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), a federal organization and thus in US Public Domain. 'Visual Concept Entertainment', either as an organization, and its people, had no contribution to the original filming and creation of this media. HanyNAR (talk) 11:49, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Endorse the comment of @HanyNAR. I do not see the reason for deleting a document created by members of the US Government. SteveMcCluskey (talk) 12:44, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --✗plicit 00:27, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Misunderstanding in backchannel communication - campaign has not agreed to release image into the public domain Bremps... 01:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Campaign has refused to release the image into the public domain, as they don't want a photo of Desvignes and Willis circulating around. They had agreed to release the image into the public domain earlier as a result of a misunderstanding. Bremps... 01:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- If they've agreed to release an image into the public domain, regardless of whether that's the result of a misunderstanding, I'm not sure if that release can be revoked. TarnishedPathtalk 01:29, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Good point, actually. I'll send email screenshots tomorrow to let others be the judge. Bremps... 07:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- If they've agreed to release an image into the public domain, regardless of whether that's the result of a misunderstanding, I'm not sure if that release can be revoked. TarnishedPathtalk 01:29, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Deletion requested by the uploader shortly after upload, but file is COM:INUSE at multiple projects. --Rosenzweig τ 09:27, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I just want to clarify the point that the Image is "INUSE at multiple projects." While this is technically correct, it looks like most of the projects are importing the image automatically from Wikidata. The INUSE argument remains valid but it appears to be based on a single edit to Wikidata rather than multiple independent edits to different projects. From Hill To Shore (talk) 13:13, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- @TarnishedPath Here are the relevant emails. The first set of emails predate the second set by about five days. Bremps... 16:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Bremps, my reading is that their first email reply from her unambiguously releases the image into the public domain. Public domain release AFAIK can't be undone. Whether that meets WMF's requirements though is another question. Ps, I thought it was rather cheeky of her to later offer to fill out the forms if you made a article for her. TarnishedPathtalk 01:26, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Well, politicians gonna politick. C'est la vie.
- Anyway, I called for help at the village pump so we can get more eyes on this. Bremps... 06:29, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Bremps, my reading is that their first email reply from her unambiguously releases the image into the public domain. Public domain release AFAIK can't be undone. Whether that meets WMF's requirements though is another question. Ps, I thought it was rather cheeky of her to later offer to fill out the forms if you made a article for her. TarnishedPathtalk 01:26, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I would tend to delete it, if alone because if I understand correctly the correct VRT process was never followed. Otherwise we are in the awkward situation where we say "We don't accept proxy statements", so the release is not considered valid at Commons, but we will clearly never get a direct statement. So at best the license will always be considered unverified, and the image should be deleted on those grounds anyway. Felix QW (talk) 06:54, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Is the VRT the only way to verify an image's copyright status? Can we link the screenshots instead? Bremps... 07:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- The main purpose of VRT in this process is to be able to carry on confidential correspondence to validate that the permission really comes from the source that owns the copyright: that they really are who they say they are and that they really own the rights. If that is not in question, then there is nothing special about VRT. - Jmabel ! talk 22:47, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
- Is the VRT the only way to verify an image's copyright status? Can we link the screenshots instead? Bremps... 07:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep The original file being deleted is fine as Desvignes did not want to be associated with this so do a better crop of this current image, crop out Desvignes completely and then suppress/oversight that version of it and then change the description to not mention her at all, just Fani and where the image was taken...simple...the image was already released by her under a free licence and with free licenses, there are not "take-backsies".--Stemoc 07:53, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Stemoc. It was clear from the Emails screenshots linked above by Bremps that an unambiguous release to public domain was made. It quickly became clear that Desvignes got their neck bent out of shape when they were cropped out and they tried to bargain with Bremps to create a WP article for them. TarnishedPathtalk 11:05, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- This is why the COM:VRT process exists. It's hard to verify emails not directly from the person, and the suggested email content is more precise and worded in a way which tries to get the copyright owner to think through the ramifications before agreeing, all to prevent misunderstandings. The first email question said "release into the public domain for Wikipedia" which may imply to only allow usage on Wikipedia, and that may be what they were agreeing to (in their minds). I think it's different when the copyright owner puts up an explicit statement when they are distributing the works themselves; in that case we can judge the statement on its own merits. While I don't doubt any of these exchanges, I think we need VRT to sign off on it, since this is the only evidence for public domain status, and anyone who uses it, if it comes to a court case. That is policy, for a reason. Even if the email was verified, they could argue they agreed to a Wikipedia-only license (which is legally valid, but would fail our own policy). So Delete for me unless VRT is satisfied. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:03, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Clindberg. The phrase "release into the public domain for Wikipedia" is not clear. Glrx (talk) 15:31, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Having looked at the email text, there is no discussion of copyright. Instead there is a simple request to release the image "into the public domain." Unfortunately, there is no clarity about which sense of the term, "public domain" is being used here. While we on Commons recognise "public domain" as meaning free from copyright, there is also the alternative sense of "available to the public." The second sense doesn't require a release of copyright restrictions (for example, you can make a file available to the public but insist it is for educational use). This is also within the time period we allow for courtesy deletions. Given that the implications weren't explained and the permission was given by the subject of the photograph (
was the uncropped version clearer on whether it was a selfie?) I don't think our justification for retention is sound. From Hill To Shore (talk) 16:09, 19 March 2024 (UTC)- The source image is clear that it isn't a selfie. Our "permission" is not from the photographer and we lack evidence that the subject who gave permission holds the copyright. From Hill To Shore (talk) 16:18, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- I wrote in my initial email "Assuming that one of your staffers took it and you own the rights to the photo... ". Bremps... 16:50, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- But that isn't evidence, it is merely an assumption. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:13, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Good point. I interpreted the "yes" from the Desvignes' campaign as an implicit acceptance of that premise, but I understand that other Wikimedians see it differently. Bremps... 17:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Also, "own the rights to the photo" is ambiguous. Does it mean "copyright", "right to possess a copy," "right to distribute," "right to sub-licence," or something else? This is why we have standard templates for the VRT process to remove misunderstandings. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- But that isn't evidence, it is merely an assumption. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:13, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- I wrote in my initial email "Assuming that one of your staffers took it and you own the rights to the photo... ". Bremps... 16:50, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- The source image is clear that it isn't a selfie. Our "permission" is not from the photographer and we lack evidence that the subject who gave permission holds the copyright. From Hill To Shore (talk) 16:18, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Agreed with Clindberg. Personally, I don't think the email exchange is sufficient enough. Legal language should be clear as possible and not confusing or ambiguous. If someone is interested in sharing a photo, I would just direct them to COM:CONSENT. It allows them to release it themselves, with clear legally binding language suitable for the site. PascalHD (talk) 00:53, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep Although I agree the emails may not be clear enough, it is clear enough to me that they've agreed to release the photo into the public domain. They were asked to release the image into the public domain... for Wikipedia, but I am sure a parliamentary candidate knows exactly what public domain is. Their staffers should, at least. The intention to delete the image because it does not help her candidacy does not convince me. The whole picture should not have been deleted in the first place. But anyway, I don't have a strong opinion and respect those who lean on the delete side. --Bedivere (talk) 16:55, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Per other people who think the file should be deleted. I'll also point out that the email was pretty clear they released the image "into the public domain for Wikipedia", not more generally, and this project requires an image be used "by anyone, for any purpose." So the image clearly cant be hosted on Commons regardless of if it's "PD for Wikipedia" or not. Although it's legally questionable if an image can be released into the public domain by a random staffer of a political campaign who probably didn't take it to begin with by saying so in an email to yet another random person on the internet. That's clearly not a legally binding release by the original creator or publisher. Although you could maybe get away with uploading it to Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. --Adamant1 (talk) 01:01, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment User:Krd appears to have deleted the file as it had an expired no permissions tag alongside the link to this discussion. Does an admin want to make a decision on this discussion now, or should we leave it open to gain a broader consensus? From Hill To Shore (talk) 14:24, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and Carl. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:22, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama for artistic works in Italy which likely makes this a copyvio. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:299B:4AB:ACA4:28AA 01:43, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- This artwork is held in the portofino museum and is a picture taken by the artist. Both the holder of the museum and the artists agreed on teh post of this image on wikipedia. Please do no make false accusations without any proofs. Denni045 (talk) 14:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- There is no evidence of any permissions. Unless you can show release under an appropriate license, the image cannot remain. Commons, and Wikipedia, do not allow licenses that only permit display on Wikipedia. And again read about how FoP works in Italy and realize that when in doubt we operate under the precautionary principle. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:9CB3:F849:5062:30B9 16:37, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Denni045 You have to send these authorizations to Commons:VRT in order to let the admins verify them. Friniate (talk) 13:25, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the instructions we will deal with it. Denni045 (talk) 09:59, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Denni045 You have to send these authorizations to Commons:VRT in order to let the admins verify them. Friniate (talk) 13:25, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
- There is no evidence of any permissions. Unless you can show release under an appropriate license, the image cannot remain. Commons, and Wikipedia, do not allow licenses that only permit display on Wikipedia. And again read about how FoP works in Italy and realize that when in doubt we operate under the precautionary principle. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:9CB3:F849:5062:30B9 16:37, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Comtoys? 186.174.67.25 02:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Why does this say Deletion request? This is my own work. I took this photo on the SUU campus, inside the student center, in Cedar City, Utah with my own camera on December 31, 2023. This photo is of my own son who is attending the university. This photo should definitely be kept. Yotejonga (talk) 23:06, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yotejonga: Apparently 186.174.67.25 is suggesting the mascot design may be copyrighted. They meant "COM:TOYS" (not exactly a "toy", though). Strakhov (talk) 22:06, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment @Yotejonga: - you took the photo, but the mascot (what is that, a plastic statue?) may have underlying copyright of its own - See COM:DW. How old is that mascot design? -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination -- Clearly infirnges on the copyright for the sculpture. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:24, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Cabayi as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: See ticket:2024010310009055. Since not all of us have VRT access and can read what's in the ticket (I can't), this is no sufficient reason for speedy deletion IMO and should be explained further. A.Savin 11:42, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- I got the first message, but since I couldn't see what this was about, I thought it was some kind of mistake or some discussion that was "above my pay-grade", so I ignored it. The upload was some time ago and the site has removed the photo since then. Of course I can't remember the exact license, but I would never have uploaded it if the license wasn't valid. Perhaps something has changed regarding uploads from the Forest Service of the United States Department of Agriculture (they used to be free), but as I understand it, you can't revoke a free license once it is given. It would be a shame to lose such a good photo, but if there is some problem with the legalese, so be it. --Cart (talk) 11:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- The correspondent's argument is essentially Copyright registration VA0002385921, search at https://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&PAGE=First
- A.Savin, if you don't have the tools to consider a request I'd suggest leaving it for someone who does.
- W.carter, so far as I can see you did everything correctly at the time.
- - Cabayi (talk) 14:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Cabayi: If you don't know the speedy deletion criteria, I'd suggest leaving it for someone who does. Thanks --A.Savin 15:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Not only is there no reason for a speedy deletion, but at this point I don't see how it qualifies for regular deletion, either. File was marked by Flickreview bot as of 2019, and the license is irrevocable. The cocatalog.loc.gov inked above tells me nothing with regard to the file in question and its license status. --A.Savin 15:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- This is probably a delete, unfortunately. The license may not be revocable, but that presumes the Forest Service had the right to license it in the first place. I can't find any record of Peter Buschmann being employed by the Forest Service at all, let alone at that time/for those photos. He looks to be a professional freelance photographer. Presumably he shared the photos with the Forest Service and someone at the Forest Service put them out with their default license without knowing any better. That it's been deleted indicates they made a mistake (or erred on the side of backing down under pressure -- a copyright registration often indicates an intention to take some kind of action to defend copyright). — Rhododendrites talk | 16:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- That sounds plausible, thanks for the input. I always regard published photos as lost photos, no need to dwell on them, but I guess there are those who are very proprietorial about all their works. --Cart (talk) 17:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment We're talking about this photo, correct? --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:45, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yes... but here's a twist: The photo displayed on the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's page in your link, is not the original version, but instead my version with a cropped bottom as shown here on Commons. See file history. So F & W must somehow got if from/via Commons after I edited it here. The F & W credit is: "Woolsey fire, Peter Buschmann/U.S. Forest Service, https://www.fws.gov/media/woolsey-fire". So in that credit it looks as if he was working for them in some capacity; but the gov might have got the shortening in the credit caption wrong. EPA, EESM, ca.gov, USFRA (all gov sites) and plenty of other sites has the original version though. As well as Smithsonian that credits the Flickr link. So it seems the photo went viral on environment sites from the Flickr link, even before I found it and uploaded it here. --Cart (talk) 10:44, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:26, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Copyrighted map in Taiwan. Solomon203 (talk) 13:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:28, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Carlos yo as duplicate (duplicate) and the most recent rationale was: "File:Cuarta especial de Universidad Católica en 1953, Estadio, 1954-01-09 (556).jpg". Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion (PNG -> JPEG). -- Túrelio (talk) 09:29, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete Unused, though lower resolution the contrast on the other file is slightly better. Both are fuzzy enough that the higher resolution is not more valuable. Consigned (talk) 19:08, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Abzeronow (talk) 01:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
COM:PACKAGE Solomon203 (talk) 11:21, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Abzeronow (talk) 01:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
COM:PACKAGE Solomon203 (talk) 12:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Abzeronow (talk) 01:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
COM:PACKAGE Solomon203 (talk) 12:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep The text seen here is no original work/literary work per COM:TAIWAN#Applicability, so {{PD-text}} applies there. The logo in the top left corner is something I can't judge (is this a normal chinese character)? Either way, it can be blurred out if nessescary. TheImaCow (talk) 19:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: logo is de minimis, rest is simple text. --Abzeronow (talk) 19:52, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
COM:PACKAGE Solomon203 (talk) 12:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep nothing original worth enough copyrighting here, the already somewhat blurred image of the child (?) falls under {{De minimis}}, and can be blurred further if deemed nessecary, as it is not the primary subject of the image. TheImaCow (talk) 19:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: The Chinese calligraphy is copyrightable. --Abzeronow (talk) 19:53, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Verletzung von Persönlichkeitsrechten Alfonsxp (talk) 12:42, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
- Unsinninger DR wie auch die anderen drei. Tag Personality Rights wurde hinzugefügt. --Denniss (talk) 14:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Abzeronow (talk) 19:55, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
