Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Puramyun31

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files uploaded by Puramyun31 (talk · contribs)

This photo (and cropped version) is licensed as CC-BY-SA-2.0 on Flickr, but it is a magazine cover, so the files should probably be deleted due to improper licensing on Flickr, as the name of the uploader of the file on Flickr isn't even the same as the name of the person who performed the concert photography.

Logan Talk Contributions 22:14, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Copyvio Béria Lima msg 20:59, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files uploaded by Puramyun31 (talk · contribs)

Puramyun31 (talk) 03:10, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 17:29, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files uploaded by Puramyun31 (talk · contribs)

5 photos of Asuka Nishi, Japanese voice actress.

These photos are taken without her consent. (see COM:BLP, COM:CSCR#Japan.) She is requesting they are deleted. (cf. her radio program Asuka Nishi's Delicate Zone #57 8m7s–; official tweets [1][2]) --Waiesu (talk) 13:26, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per previous discussions, photo of a public figure, taken in a public place during a public event, fall into the COM:CSCR#Japan exceptions. If there's really a legal problem with those pictures, the personality or the producer/agent should contact legal@wikimedia.org instead with some proof. They're also welcome to send us an official picture, see COM:OTRS/ja for more information. --Thibaut120094 (talk) 14:04, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files uploaded by Puramyun31 (talk · contribs)

Not in use, doubtful educational value.

— Racconish ☎ 20:55, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: withdrawn. --Sealle (talk) 13:55, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files uploaded by Puramyun31 (talk · contribs)

COM:TOY issues. Lots of stuffed animals that would be copyrightable in the US. Part of a large batch upload. Most were fine or de minimus but these are a little too close for comfort so I'm bringing them here.

Majora (talk) 02:53, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep This DR seems to be somewhat too speculative because the DR is opened for just the reason "a little too close for comfort", with regard to com:assume good faith. The photos are clearly not intended to depict the toys as main subjects. if really the images are deleted per the reason "a little too close for comfort", these images (which are introduced as examples of de minimis, the images include "copyrightable parts" even at the centers of these) will not also be survived at all. --Puramyun31 (talk) 11:29, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting something because it is a little too close to comfort is a Commons policy. In any case, I spent literally hours combing through this batch of uploads from this site eliminating dozens of images that had stuffed animals in them that were actually de minimis. Of course you think they are fine, you wouldn't have uploaded them if you didn't. However, if you seriously think that something like File:1월 21일 오마이걸 팬사인회 (90).jpg is de minimis we have a much larger issue. That is a copyrighted Cartoon Network cartoon character. Front and center in the image. In a location that would also render the image useless if removed. I'm willing to work with you here. Crop out some parts of the images if need be. But to call these all de minimis is reaching way too far. --Majora (talk) 21:25, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination -- Also note that I could not find a CC-BY icon on the source page. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:39, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Restored: as per UDR. I restored the files where the toy is only de minimis (half hidden, blurred, etc.). I cropped some files. Yann (talk) 07:31, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files uploaded by Puramyun31 (talk · contribs)

According to this translation, these images just are screenshots and are not photos taken by the blogger. these uploads are my mistake.

Puramyun31 (talk) 12:07, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Unused. Uploaded recently. DR by uploader request. Speedy G7. --Majora (talk) 21:52, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files uploaded by Puramyun31 (talk · contribs)

No metadata, license laundering is suspected and/or the uploader on lofter is not the copyright owner. -Mys_721tx (talk) 18:12, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Channel does not exist, unable to verify the official status. -Mys_721tx (talk) 18:12, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

partial  Keep @Mys 721tx: just "no metadata" is not simply a reason of deletion, since there is no real clue of first publishing of the images at other webpage(s) and the lofter blog(s) copied from the webpage(s)(per image search results, 160106 幻城媒体探班 最近好喜欢刘蕾啊 嘻嘻 (刘力菲 谢蕾蕾) imagecut search 1imagecut search 2 【一个脑洞】 跟之前写的菲蕾那篇连起来的 (郑丹妮 陈珂) imagecut search 1 imagecut search 2 and the youtube video 【TPE48一期生徵選形象歌曲】「向前走」★小花絮③★.webm has archived page (https://archive.fo/kxdSt) and license info HTML code (https://imgur.com/a/QJgDGeg).

except 啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊啊 无限循环播放 (秦岚), since the images are from http://peachring.com/weibo/user/5628148368/4283527518323172

Puramyun31 (talk) 00:03, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per the precautionary principle, low resolution and the lack of metadata are sufficient to remove a file. Your example has perfectly demonstrated that the license declaration of some files from Lofter are untrustworthy. -Mys_721tx (talk) 02:49, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't say "where the images are from another website(s)" as seperately (image by image), but just repeatly said "low resolution and the lack of metadata". this is a speculation. there are many low resolution/no metadata files but the fact is not necessarily a reason of deletion. also the youtube video at this DR has archived page and license info as i said above, and the cc license of the video is irrevocable.Puramyun31 (talk) 03:07, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  1. By your own words, four files in this DR alone are not licensed by their author. The previous DR on this page also shows files that have this problem. Taking those into account, Lofter is untrustworthy for its copyright declaration and metadata must be required for verification. The lack thereof also warrants deletion.
  1. The channel in question is not verified on Youtube. Merely having the word "official" does not mean this channel is indeed the copyright owner. There is at least one case the YouTube licensing is abused. Until the identity of the channel has been confirmed, the irrevocability of the CC license is irrelevant to the discussion.
  1. If you notice any editor that are importing resolution/no metadata files en masse from an untrustworthy source, feel free to start a separated DR. However, the existence of such files are not valid defense in this DR.
-Mys_721tx (talk) 05:23, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"By your own words, four files in this DR alone are not licensed by their author. The previous DR on this page also shows files that have this problem. Taking those into account, Lofter is untrustworthy for its copyright declaration and metadata must be required for verification. The lack thereof also warrants deletion." : the reason of "The previous DR" as you said is not related to the existance of metadata but I opened the DR just according to blog user's comment, as the reason that is screenshots from a TV program from another site. also don't make the mistake of blanket/hasty generalization of "trustworthiness" of lofter images without talking about "where the images are from another website(s)" for each lofter images.

"The channel in question is not verified on Youtube. Merely having the word "official" does not mean this channel is indeed the copyright owner. There is at least one case the YouTube licensing is abused. Until the identity of the channel has been confirmed, the irrevocability of the CC license is irrelevant to the discussion." : the youtube account (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCumoYG0Ijzya5vcry8szlzQ, "author" section of the file page) is official account, as per HTML Code of archived TPE48 official website Puramyun31 (talk) 10:58, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I had no doubt that the blog owner is the copyright holder of the images in their posts, and no metadata is not sufficient grounds to argue deletion under COM:PCP, as I have an uploaded of a picture I took myself on the English Wikipedia with no metadata other than the program I used to edit it (en:File:FNC Entertainment entrance.jpg). So, as I searched for more conclusive evidence, I was led to a link which redirects to the user's Weibo account. There, I made the unfortunate discovery of the following text: "好多鱼【本博图禁止去logo、商用以及任何形式二改，转载请注明出处。】". Google Translate: "A lot of fish [This blog is forbidden to go to logo, commercial and any form of second change, please indicate the source. 】". I don't understand Chinese, but it seems pretty clear derivatives and commercial use is prohibited. I think this cements the user's credibility as the photographer, but not in the way we needed.

These pictures, as well as some others not found on the Lofter blog, are found on other webpages. COM:PCP can be applied here.

This is based on the blog contents. It is mostly fan art, with an occasional picture. This other photo has a second watermarked, but its unclear of what it says. This might be screenshot (is that a cropped logo in the upper left?). This is mostly a stab at the dark, really... I don't think there's sufficient evidence either way.

Lofter is a blog service, so scrutiny should be made by account rather than the site as a whole. We don't call Flickr untrustworthy based solely on the amount of license laudering that goes on there. ℯxplicit 09:28, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Explicit: according to these searches (1 2 3), "160106 幻城媒体探班" photo themselves don't exist on the weibo blog https://www.weibo.com/rofs0712, so the weibo text does not applicable in this case. Puramyun31 ( talk) 07:22, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Explicit: Precisely because Lofter is made of user generated content, all images from it should not be viewed as freely-licensed by default. The same applies to images from Flickr. The lack of metadata and the low resolution certainly do not help the case. -05:42, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, all but 【TPE48一期生徵選形象歌曲】「向前走」★小花絮③★.webm. Ruthven (msg) 14:28, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Puramyun31 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Oops, sorry for my mistake. these are accidentally uploaded (using flickr2commons, Flickr tag "新内眞衣")

Puramyun31 (talk) 04:27, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 16:25, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Puramyun31 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Oops, sorry for my mistake. these are accidentally uploaded.

Puramyun31 (talk) 14:01, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 16:24, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Puramyun31&oldid=779686493"