Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2020/04/25
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
Out of project scope. Personal photo of non-notable person (deleted on cs.wiki and en.wiki), just for self promotion. Also see other RFD's like Commons:Deletion requests/File:OndraDorian.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ondra Dorian .jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Male model from the United Kingdom.jpg. Harold (talk) 06:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Keep No. its not self promotion. Its from student movie. This is more than personal. Cause you can see message from Harold friend: don't bother. we will re-nominate the photo, making this an empty category again. But we will re-uloaded photos again also. #harrasment.I will report this.--Terez666 (talk) 06:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 07:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Personal, unused picture. Out of scope. SirEdimon Dimmi!!! 00:39, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by 1989 at 01:09, 25 April 2020 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing (F1) --Krdbot 07:37, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
An updated photo of Ramy Khodeir will replace this one. Thanks. Divineeternity (talk) 05:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. OoS anyway. --Gbawden (talk) 08:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
A imagem ficou muito grande André Alves da Silva da Orionlab (talk) 16:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim (talk) 16:13, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Not free photo by Тимур Дейна from magazine Elle source Venzz (talk) 07:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: speedy, per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 19:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
User's only contributions to any project are to upload selfies and write an autobiography on his user page. Out of scope. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 08:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 16:09, 25 April 2020 UTC: CSD F10 (personal photos out of COM:SCOPE --Krdbot 19:38, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope personal photo. User's only contributions in last two years are uploading selfies and an autobiography on their user page. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 08:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 16:09, 25 April 2020 UTC: CSD F10 (personal photos out of COM:SCOPE --Krdbot 19:38, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by ITCubeSolution (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused advertisement of company of questionable notability.
- File:Top Features That Make a Great Corporate Intranet Solution.pdf
- File:ITConnect - Intranet Platform Tailored For Your Business.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Spam. --Herby talk thyme 08:29, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
Screenshot froma live TV Show of WWE, copyrifghted. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 18:08, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Storkk at 09:49, 30 April 2020 UTC: Likely copyright violation; see COM:Licensing. If you are the copyright holder, please follow the instructions on OTRS. --Krdbot 13:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
© Photo : Paul LOUIS. Lomita (talk) 08:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Speedy delete
There is an OTRS email received for “File:Thierry_Bontridder_-_Parure,_1994.jpg” but not processed yet, ticket:2020042610003635. Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 22:19, 26 April 2020 (UTC)- I have just accepted permission for “File:Thierry_Bontridder_-_Parure,_1994.jpg” under ticket:2020042610003635. Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 16:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: OTRS permission verified now by Nat. pandakekok9 02:22, 1 May 2020 (UTC) (non-admin closure)
copyvio: the uploader claims the picture to be "own work", but he picture itself shows who the author is (at the bottom): Gerhard Streich. the uploader is confirmed (in dewiki) to be someone else but Gerhard Streich Rennrigor (talk) 12:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- nominated for speedy deletion. --Rennrigor (talk) 12:21, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Diese Datei ist mein Eigentum. Ich habe die Datei erstellt. Das Original besitze ich als WORD Datei. Das Original hat keine Bildunterschrift. Diese habe ich vor dem Hochladen auf WIKIMEDIA COMMONS hinzugefügt, um auf einen Beitrag von Gerhard Streich im erwähnten Werk zu verweisen, wo die Tafel ebenfalls (ohne Bildunterschrift) abgedruck ist. Die Datei darf gerne von Interessenten genutzt werden.--Christian von Plessen (talk) 16:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Delete - Jetzt sehe ich es auch, was Rennrigor nachstehend völlig zu recht und zutreffend festgestellt hat. Der Autor ist Gerhard Streich - vgl. unten. Jeder der dieses wichtige Bild i.R.d. hier unter COMMONS festgelegten - +++Lizensierung+++ nutzt (z.B. Schulen oder Kindergärten), muss und darf völlig zu recht davon ausgehen, dass einzig & alleine Gerhard Streich der Autor und Bildrechteinhaber dieser Abfotografie aus einem Buch ist, da Gerhard Streich unten als Autor ganz klar ersichtlich ausgewiesen wird. Hier liegt nach derzeitigem Stand dieses sehr wichtigen Bildes ein offensichtlicher Urheberrechteverstoß vor; Schnelllöschung ist aus rechtlichen Gründen deshalb unverzüglich erforderlich. PS : Vielleicht sollte aber irgendjemand diesem hochambitionierten User & COMMONS-Neuling "sehr schonend" beibringen, dass er nunmehr eine OTRS-Freigabe des Bildrechteinhabers unter Commons braucht, wenn dieses wichtige Bild unter den COMMONS verbleiben soll - vgl. z.B. z.B. WIE HIER. - Auch für einen selbsterklärten geschichtlichen Laien muss DAS verständlich sein, wenn er an einer seriösen Enzyklopädie & insbes. dem COMMONS-Bilderdienst uneigennützig mitwirken will (das 120-Euro Buch des an Geschichte interessierten (& ursprünglich in de.wp infinit gesperrten) Laien kennt jetzt nun wirklich jeder hier - und muss sicherlich nicht länger kommerziell beworben werden) ! --Gordito1869 (talk) 06:27, 29 April 2020 (UTC)- Delete Uploader is lying, saying it was his own work. picture itself shows who the author is (at the bottom): Gerhard Streich. the uploader is confirmed (in dewiki) to be someone else but Gerhard Streich. --Rennrigor (talk) 10:28, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Compare this file with the other files the user uploaded, e.g. File:Stammtafel Helmold II.-Scan.jpg. The latter is a file created by the user. Notice the difference. The nominated file is a picture photographed from a book. Notice it has exif data, while the files created by the uploader himself don't. --Rennrigor (talk) 22:52, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- strong Keep: I do not see any arguments for deletion. The uploader is the editor of a book written by 45 scientists and in which this table ist used, he is also the creator of this file and has given furthermore the references in this file for further readings for his coauthor Gerhard Streich concerning the visualized article by the uploader as subtitle as well as the reference of title and editorship of the complete book. There is nothing to compare. The procedures of uploading do not have any effect for an allegedly copyvio. The subtitles are produced only for this file and are lacking on the table in the book Maueranker + Stier. Why should the editor of a book dare to make a copyvio with his cowriters. For editorial information see user page on wp:de, the user is a verified account while User Gordito is blocked infinitely blocked for years. I do not want to repeat the personal attack. The applicant has no reason to offend the uploader--Oursana (talk) 01:03, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Oursana : Werte Kollegin, ich bin in Wikimedia-Commons & internationalen Wiki-Projekten ein geschätzter Kollege, der über einen Zeitraum von mehr als 10-Jahren (!) einen anerkannt seriösen & unentgeltlichen Bilderdienst leistet (um rein nichts anderes hat es hier - unter COMMONS - zu gehen ! (de.wp ist ein eigenständiges Wiki-Projekt, das mit den COMMONS lediglich kommuniziert)); die völlig unprovozierten vorstehenden Entgleisungen gegen meinen hiesigen Account verbitte ich mir. Im Wiederholungsfall bitte ich einen COMMONS-Administrator kraft seines Amtes darum, diese völlig unprovozierten Entgleisungen und hier irrelevanten Einlassungen der Kollegin Oursana entspr. zu würdigen (die Gestaltung meiner USER-Seiten unter COMMONS ist im Übrigen meine Angelegenheit; für Kritik steht dort jedoch eigens und jederzeit mein G Ä S T E B U C H zur Verfügung). - EOD von meiner Seite ! - --Gordito1869 (talk) 05:50, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
- strong
- Delete Simple case, violation documented in uploaded file, --He3nry (talk) 09:12, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
- It is not, it was the uploader who gave the reference. The concerning book page in Maueranker and Stier does not show "Streich"Oursana (talk) 11:22, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Sehr geehrter Herr von Plessen,
vielen Dank für Ihren Anruf vom 28. April 2020. Ich habe mir heute auf WIKIMEDIA COMMONS und WIKIPEDIA abgesehen, welche Anschuldigungen gegen Sie wegen angeblicher Urheberrechtsverletzungen erhoben werden. Das ist doch blanker Unfug! Für keine der Im Buch erschienenen Tafeln, die im Zusammenhang mit meinen Beiträgen stehen, besitze ich das Urheberrecht; es gehört Ihnen.Sie haben es doch beim Hochladen der Tafeln persönlich bestätigt und es auf Befragung wiederholt. - Ausdrücklich möchte ich mich dafür bedanken, dass Sie in einer Fußnote der bei der WIKIMEDIA COMMONS hochgeladenen Blätter meinen Namen und den Bezug zu meinen Arbeiten in unserem Werk hergestellt haben. - Beschämend ist der Ton von einigen Typen; dagegen sollte das Portal vorgehen. Gerne dürfen Sie diese Mail dort vorlegen - bitte ohne Preisgabe meiner Kontaktdaten. ImFalle eines Prozesses werde ich diese Aussage wiederholen.
Mit besten Grüssen
Dr. Gerhard Streich
--Christian von Plessen (talk) 15:19, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
- I doubt that this in an email written by a Dr. Gerhard Streich. Some expressions are the same that user:Christian von Plessen uses in his posts on dewiki on a regular basis, e.g. "Unfug" ("nonsense"). Some expressions are written in the same way (capital letters) that user:Christian von Plessen uses in his posts on dewiki on a regular basis, e.g. "WIKIPEDIA", "WIKIMEDIA COMMONS". user:Christian von Plessen posted (almost) the same text on dewiki, but on dewiki the text is slightly different. --Rennrigor (talk) 08:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- wouldn't it be wise instead of using copyvio without proof, to state, that there are doubts concerning the copyright ownership, for those who have thoseOursana (talk) 13:33, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- strong Keep:-- Historicus Als einer der mehr als 40 wissenschaflichen Autoren des Sammelwerkes "Maueranker und Stier" bestätige in genauer Kenntnis der Entstehungsgeschichtes des Werkes ausdrücklich:
- strong
- Die Tabelle "Besitzfolge", für die hier ein Löschantrag gestellt wurde, ist aus Diskussionen des Herausgebers Dr. Christian von Plessen mit verschiedenen am Werk beteiligten Autoren entstanden, darunter auch der Kollege Dr. Gerhard Streich, und auch ich selbst war im Vorfeld in die Vorstufen dieser und der meisten anderen auf das Mittelalter bezogenen Tabellen involviert.
- Um Dr. Streichs Anteil am Vorentwurf von "Besitzfolge" deutlich zu machen, hat der Herausgeber Dr. Christian von Plessen in Wikimedia dessen Namen von sich aus hinzugesetzt, während diese Tabelle im gedruckten Werk selbst nicht namentlich gezeichnet ist.
- Aus diesen Zusammenhängen heraus beansprucht Dr. Streich (siehe oben) kein Urheberrecht an dieser Tabelle, das also auch nicht verletzt werden kann.
- Im übrigen kann ich auch bestätigen, dass der Landeshistoriker Dr. Gerhard Streich tatsächlich der Autor der oben zitierten Email ist. Historicus
- Herr Professor, vielen Dank für die Klarstellung! --Achim (talk) 21:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Die Tabelle wurde faktisch von einem Team erstellt. Per above discussion a copyright violation is not to be assumed. --Achim (talk) 21:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mmadu Johnson (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE.
Patrick Rogel (talk) 16:08, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 04:46, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
cross wiki spam - deleted on other projects Quakewoody (talk) 00:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete FAcebook code in EXIF. Permission from photographer is needed. --Ganímedes (talk) 02:02, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 04:46, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of project Sakhalinio (talk) 00:10, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 04:50, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:07, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
Personal, unused picture. Out of scope. SirEdimon Dimmi!!! 05:20, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 04:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Unused photo of an unknown person – out of COM:SCOPE. jdx Re: 06:13, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 04:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Unused personal photo. Solomon203 (talk) 06:45, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 04:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Self promo on en.wiki
Minoraxtalk (formerly 大诺史) 07:18, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 04:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of project scope. pandakekok9 09:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ahmadtalk 04:46, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Advertisement of questionable notability.
- File:Fördjupning i varumärkes expandering etablering - Gyllenstorm.pdf
- File:Advanced edition. mobilapplikation och digital marknadsföring - Gyllenstorm.png
- File:Gyllsofta - Gyllenstorm.png
- File:Affiliate marketing - Gyllenstorm.png
- File:Mobilapplikation och digital marknadsföring- Gyllenstorm.png
- File:Product psychology - Gyllenstorm.png
- File:CV and internet marketing - Gyllenstorm.png
- File:Sound podcasts marketing and seo - Gyllenstorm.png
- File:Vcf file and internet marketing - Gyllenstorm.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:35, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk Mail 14:38, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Advertisement of questionable notability. Also has a previous DR for similar reasons.
- File:Gyllsofta Linklist Austria.png
- File:Gyllsofta Linklist Spain.png
- File:Gyllsofta Linklist China.png
- File:Gyllsofta Linklist Germany.png
- File:Gyllsofta Linklist Japan.png
- File:Gyllsofta Linklist Taiwan.png
- File:Gyllsofta Linklist France.png
- File:Gyllsofta Linklist Netherland.png
- File:Gyllsofta Linklist Norway.png
- File:Gyllsofta Linklist Monaco.png
✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 11:42, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 04:56, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Hosseinbohlouli (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of project scope: personal files or promotional.
4nn1l2 (talk) 13:25, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ahmadtalk 04:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Fardin1993 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of project scope.
4nn1l2 (talk) 13:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 04:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:30, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ahmadtalk 04:50, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ahmadtalk 05:04, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused documents of questionable notability.
- File:Trademark Chigar.jpg
- File:Suka Pinakurat International Trademark Europe.png
- File:Suka Pinakurat International Trademark Australia.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 04:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:06, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 04:59, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Commons is not a photo album. Out of scope.
- File:Holy6ix feat Rosebrown Gat goes haters.jpg
- File:Odigie Junior, aka Thabo Wayne Segoana, better known by his stage name Holy6ix, is a Nigerian rapper. He was born in Benin city and raised in Lagos city. He was initially signed to Thabo label We the great Group in 2017.jpg
- File:Holy6ix the GOAT.jpg
- File:Eye of a legend,.jpg
- File:Holy6ix performed at Udo mixed secondary school.jpg
- File:Blieve in your dreams.jpg
- File:Never lied.jpg
- File:Holy6ix.jpg
Minoraxtalk (formerly 大诺史) 15:13, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by M.J Mahbu Alam Timothy (talk · contribs)
[edit]Commons is not a photo album. Out of scope.
- File:N.J Esther calling.jpg
- File:Esther jahan.jpg
- File:N.J Esther Choosing.jpg
- File:N.J Esther stylish.jpg
- File:N.J Esther.jpg
- File:M.J and N.J.jpg
- File:Noor Jahan.jpg
- File:Mahbualam.jpg
- File:Timothy love.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam like girl.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam clicking photo.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam in home.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam football player group.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam celebrating independence day.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam in Christmas.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam 2017 style.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam lover.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam funny photos.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam car.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam on the tree.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam in Office.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alma brother.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam 2018.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam talking.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam in park.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam using computer.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam lovely.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam at home.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam Graduation.jpg
- File:Timothy and Usman.jpg
- File:M.J Timothy.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam and Usman.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam Timtohy.jpg
- File:Mahbu Alam NIOS pass result.png
Minoraxtalk (formerly 大诺史) 15:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:02, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo/drawing album. Not used.
- File:Khalil DcTv Vive Tu Vida.jpg
- File:Khalil DcTv En El Barrio.jpg
- File:Khalil DcTv Relax.jpg
- File:Khalil DcTv Trenzas.jpg
- File:Discografica.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:04, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Abelinks994 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
- File:Rebecca reijman.jpg.jpg
- File:Della Firdatia official.jpg.jpg
- File:Djavrilaviw.jpg
- File:Dj arien cathrine.jpg
- File:Arien Cathrine.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:19, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:05, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:25, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:45, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:46, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Trafykante (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Wiki Loves Africa KENYA (talk · contribs)
[edit]Commons:Derivative works from vehicles art.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:50, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jean-Pierre Marongiu (talk · contribs)
[edit]Promo materials. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:Qaptif sans bandeau.jpg
- File:Aussi-noire-que-soit-ma-nuit-je-reviendrai-vers-toi couv 1e TV.jpg
- File:JP montagne.jpg
- File:Conférence La Pena.jpg
- File:Paris 2020 jardin luxembourg.jpg
- File:Salon du Livre la Roziere 2019.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:08, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by User:Wallbe
[edit]All the images seem like a copyvio from wallbe.de. Therefore all the files below should be deleted.
- File:Wallbe MAX.png - see https://www.wallbe.de/en/wallbe-max/
- File:Wallbe Pro - Wallbox.png - see http://www.wallbe.de/oeffentliches-laden/wallbe-pro-oeffentlich/
- File:Wallbe Pro - Ladesäule.png - per above
- File:Wallbe Pro Plus - Ladesäule.png - per above
- File:Wallbe Pro Plus - Wallbox.png - per above
- File:Wallbe ZAS 4.0 basic.png - see https://www.wallbe.de/en/wallbe-zas-4-0-basic/
- File:Wallbe ZAS 4.0 evu.png - per above
- File:Wallbe Dual Bike - Ladesäule.png
- File:Wallbe Dual Bike - Wallbox.png - see https://www.wallbe.de/en/ebikes/wallbe-dual-bike/
- File:Wallbe E-Bike Tower.png
- File:Wallbe Eco 2.0.png
- File:Wallbe LUX.png - see https://www.wallbe.de/en/wallbe-lux/
- File:Wallbe LUX smart.png - see https://www.wallbe.de/en/wallbe-lux-smart/
- File:Wallbe NEO.png - https://www.wallbe.de/en/wallbe-neo/
- File:Wallbe Premium.png - see https://www.wallbe.de/en/commercial-charging/wallbe-premium/
- File:Wallbe Sun4Charge.png
- File:Wallbe Logo green grey.svg (logo)
Could be one of those accounts where a company uploads their files to Commons, but
- a) there is no proof of that
- b) it can not stay that way.
--D-Kuru (talk) 16:27, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:09, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
out of scope - personal photo Mindmatrix 17:19, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:10, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by Khan tabrez 16 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE people including :en:Dr Anjum Lucknowi.
Patrick Rogel (talk) 09:21, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:10, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Khan tabrez 16 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Commons:Scope Personal Photos of non-contributor, Promotional intent and blocked on enwiki for the same, Educationally not useful COM:SELFIE
- File:Dr anjum lucknowi.jpg
- File:Mushira.jpg
- File:Dranjumlucknowi.jpg
- File:Shikwa Jawabe Shikwa.jpg
- File:Shikwa Jawab e Shikwa.jpg
- File:Azmat E Maan.jpg
- File:Shikwa Jawabe Shikwa Award.jpg
- File:Allama Iqbal Award.jpg
- File:Dr Anjum Lucknowi.jpg
QueerEcofeminist "cite! even if you fight"!!! [they/them/their] 17:29, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Art by not notable person. One file depicts person itself. Commons is not the private media repository.
- File:Christian Gill painting.jpeg
- File:Atman by Christian Gill.jpg 2010.jpg
- File:Love Collision.jpg
- File:Christian Gill " The anxiety of possibilities".jpg
- File:Christian Gill.jpg
Estopedist1 (talk) 17:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:13, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
out of scope - selfie Mindmatrix 18:00, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:12, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
out of scope - selfie Mindmatrix 18:00, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:12, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
out of scope - selfie Mindmatrix 18:00, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by 123456789Marinuchi (talk · contribs)
[edit]unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope
- File:Junioooo el veranitoooo 2014-03-30 03-43.jpg
- File:Mayo 2014-03-30 03-35.jpg
- File:Mis 28- os amoooo!!=M 2014-03-30 03-29.jpg
Estopedist1 (talk) 18:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:12, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope – unenlightening picture of an unidentified man. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:06, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:15, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Small size, low quality files, pertaining to computer hacking / bitcoin etc. Unlikely own work at any level.
- File:Portfel WannaCry.png
- File:Hakerzy na forum podali adres portfela.jpg
- File:Komunikat z ataku wyświetlany na komuterze Ministra Ukrainy.jpg
- File:Komunikat z ataku WannaCry.jpg
- File:Komunikat w bankomacie z ataku NotPetya.jpg
- File:Wykradzione informacje były przesyłane w żądaniu jako ciasteczka.png
- File:Kolejny wariant komunikatu ataku NotPetya.jpg
- File:Ofiary ataku z podziałem na kraje.webp
Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:24, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:16, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Hebertsanchez (talk · contribs)
[edit]Art by not notable person. Commons is not the private media repository.
- File:Iluminacion.jpg
- File:Alturas 200 x 170 cm.jpg
- File:Luz cayendo 170 x 120.jpg
- File:Renacer, oleo sobre lienzo, 180 x 150cm.jpg
- File:Paraiso azul oleo 170 x 150.jpg
Estopedist1 (talk) 18:39, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unused personal photo. Out of project scope. ~Moheen (keep talking) 19:38, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Personal image. OoS. E4024 (talk) 20:39, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Josebdieguez (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE, small, no EXIF data.
Ahmadtalk 20:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rajitram Patel (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE.
Ahmadtalk 22:25, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rajitram Patel (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal Photos of non-contributors, all their contributions are on the same userpage, which is been used as webhost vio.
- File:Raj patel.jpg
- File:RAJITRAM.jpg
- File:Utkarsh r.jpg
- File:Utkarsh Rajit patel.jpg
- File:Rajitram P.jpg
- File:Rajit.jpg
QueerEcofeminist "cite! even if you fight"!!! [they/them/their] 05:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Liam Townsley (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE. In addition, both photos are apparently screenshots with unclear copyright status.
Ahmadtalk 23:56, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Self promo, OoS. E4024 (talk) 01:46, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:37, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
no FOP in South Korea. The architect 방철린 is a living person.
- File:Joongang3w.jpg
- File:Joongang2w.jpg
- File:Book21-1w.jpg
- File:Yunhadang1w.jpg
- File:Tantan1w.jpg
- File:LoneP1w.jpg
- File:Dukyun1w.jpg
- File:Joongang1w.jpg
- File:Gyowook1w.jpg
- File:Yunhadang2w.jpg
- File:Wonju1w.jpg
- File:YNstep1w.jpg
- File:Susan1w.jpg
- File:HANEUL1w.jpg
- File:Sanbit1w.jpg
- File:Handong1w.jpg
- File:Mijaeroo1w.jpg
- File:Jejustaybiuda1w.jpg
- File:Maesongheon1w.jpg
– Kwj2772 (talk) 08:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:40, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Unused logo, out of project Sakhalinio (talk) 00:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 06:35, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
promotional logo with no usage and bad licensing — Draceane talkcontrib. 09:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 07:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope. The only uploading by this user. Estopedist1 (talk) 17:58, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 07:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
The combination of the phrase "SUPPORT PLEASE" and the use of this image on a now-deleted self-promotional page at enwiki suggests this is nothing more than spam. No encyclopedic use. Out of scope. Kinu (talk) 18:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Size, lack of quality and no metadata would strongly suggest not own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Size, lack of quality and location of photographer suggest this is something harvested from internet, or a screenshot, not own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
loaded by error. Should appear related to an article which is still being elaborated. Rissen-Offa (talk) 18:43, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
uploaded by error. Should only appear related to an article which is still being elaborated. Rissen-Offa (talk) 18:45, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Also:
Bogus CC license; scan from family album and uploader is not the author, and explicitly does not know the author (permission field is "Foto stammt möglicherweise von seinem Enkel Siegfried Müller-Teut"). Permission from the actual author is required. Эlcobbola talk 14:31, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Eligible for speedy deletion. See also COM:UDR. --De728631 (talk) 22:17, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
Copyvio : https://web.facebook.com/Rickytourstravel/photos/pcb.751553515326852/751553391993531/?type=3&theater GuillaumeG (talk) 19:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
cross wiki spam Quakewoody (talk) 19:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: not free at source. --Gbawden (talk) 08:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
unused, uncategorized. Too scarce description Estopedist1 (talk) 19:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
I am not sure if I am allowed to upload this picture. See category page on Adam Fischer: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Adam_Fischer FredN (talk) 20:20, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete: Unfortunately no FOP in Denmark. --Achim (talk) 16:33, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
No reason to suspect it being own work. No source, author or permission is given. Jonteemil (talk) 20:27, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Personal image I found in Category:Personas. E4024 (talk) 20:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Content without appropriate consent, inside a private event (not a public place) 92.19.169.121 20:42, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Worthless, poor quality, non-educational image with no redeeming qualities whatsoever. AshFriday (talk) 00:13, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
.svg/20px-Pictogram_voting_comment_(orange).svg.png)
Comment Image in in use in two projects, therefore by definition within project scope, so not worthless, not without redeeming qualities, not non-educational. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 02:46, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Per nominee's "Content without appropriate consent, inside a private event (not a public place)", all Burning Man media should either be deleted or kept in bulk. Has this issue been judged before? If there is any previous finding, it should be linked in the talk page of the parent category. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 02:45, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Keep In use in fr.wikibooks.org Photographie/Thèmes/Le nu and ksh.wikipedia.org Critical Tit, so usual copy-past arguments of it being "Worthless, poor quality, non-educational image with no redeeming qualities whatsoever" does not hold water. Also, Burning Man ocorres in Black Rock Desert, part of en:Black Rock Desert–High Rock Canyon Emigrant Trails National Conservation Area, so US Federal Lands and so a public space. Per previous DR outside tents, in Burning Man there is not a single expectation of provacy, so this Ip arguments are bogus. Tm (talk) 11:48, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 08:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused map. Should be in MediaWiki graph or SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 20:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:16, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 20:58, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
obvious copyvio DHN (talk) 21:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; PCP. --Gbawden (talk) 08:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
out of scope Quakewoody (talk) 22:07, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 08:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
screenshot Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:26, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 10:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
screenshot Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:26, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 10:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Personal image, also small file size. Possibly not own work, but apparently out of scope. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:29, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 10:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
copyvio, artist born in 1951, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 17:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Es ist mir völlig unverständlich warum das Bild gelöscht wurde. Ich will es nicht! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eduard Kratzfuss (talk • contribs) 18:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Es sind Werke eines zeitgenössischen Künstlers abgebildet, die sich in Deutschland in einem Innenraum befinden, demnach nicht unter die Panoramafreiheit fallen; also geht es nur mit gültiger OTRS-Freigabe. Danke fürs Berücksichtigen, --Martin Sg. (talk) 10:38, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Die Verbindung zwischen dem Hauptautor des de-Artikels (Pseudonym des "Lindenberg-Sekretärs") und dem "zeitgenössischen Künstler" ohne relevantes Werk nach RBK ist ein einziges Ärgernis, das einen neutral-enzyklopädischen Artikel unmöglich macht, weil er der Lebensinhalt des Hauptautors zu sein scheint. Soll "der Künstler" doch eine Freigabe erteilen, sonst löschen. Der Artikel ist illustriert, allerdings mit einer unglaublich schechten Illustration, die vom "Hauptautor" verteidigt wird. Jeder darf sich nach eigenen Kräften blamieren. Der Fall ist hoffnungslos. --Autumn Windfalls (talk) 04:51, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- Es sind Werke eines zeitgenössischen Künstlers abgebildet, die sich in Deutschland in einem Innenraum befinden, demnach nicht unter die Panoramafreiheit fallen; also geht es nur mit gültiger OTRS-Freigabe. Danke fürs Berücksichtigen, --Martin Sg. (talk) 10:38, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- There is an OTRS email received for “File:Kunstausstellung_"Auf_den_Punkt!"_im_historischen_Buxtehuder_Marschtorzwinger.jpg” but not processed yet, ticket:2020050210000958. --Mussklprozz (talk) 07:41, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Kunstausstellung_"Auf_den_Punkt!"_im_historischen_Buxtehuder_Marschtorzwinger.jpg” under ticket:2020050210000958. --Mussklprozz (talk) 07:49, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Reinhard Kraasch (talk) 11:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Patrick Rogel as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G10 Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 02:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Patrick Rogel: Out of curiosity, could you provide a rationale as to why this image should be deleted under CSD G10 (Files and pages created as advertisements)? The image appears to be in use (on a userpage) and, therefore, in scope, and does not appear to be an ad or blatant self-promotion. --Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 02:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Nat: It's a mistake, it was intended to be F10 but I missed it was in use. --Patrick Rogel (talk) 06:55, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Patrick Rogel: Thanks for the reply and the explanation. --Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 13:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- That being said, Ramkumar Kalyani appears to be the subject of the photo, and while they claim to be the author, it is unlikely, and, therefore, its copyright status is unknown. The copyright holder of a photograph is the person who took the photograph, rather than a person who appears in it, unless the copyright is transferred by operation of law or contract. For the image to be kept, the photographer needs to send permission and a release under an acceptable free licence or Ramkumar Kalyani needs clarify how the copyright was transferred--in both instances, via OTRS. Until permission is confirmed via OTRS, Delete per COM:PRP. --Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 03:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Delete Agreed. The subject / uploader needs to have the actual photographer send a free license using OTRS. He also must stop claiming that he is the photographer unless he actually is. Such incorrect claims make it hard to believe anything he says and may lead to his being banned from Commons.. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:21, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per Nat. --Ahmadtalk 21:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/185788639@N02
[edit]Appears to be a Flickrwashing account, created in December 2019, seemingly specifically to upload these photos. All relatively low-res, with no EXIF data.
- File:Temidayo Oniosun.jpg
- File:Michael Andrew.jpg
- File:Wild logo Limited.png
- File:Ben Chase in 2019.jpg
Ytoyoda (talk) 05:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 01:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: it seems to be notable; see w:pt:Mercado da Romeira. However, given that we already have File:Logotipo Mercado da Romeira.png on a white background, I think it's unlikely for this file to be used. --Ahmadtalk 21:53, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope: PDF file, contains encyclopedic information already present at w:es:Italia. Aleator (talk) 01:34, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 20:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ahmadtalk 22:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ahmadtalk 22:10, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:38, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ahmadtalk 22:15, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; not to be confused with w:fr:La Droite populaire. --Ahmadtalk 22:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
copyvio, artist born in 1951, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 17:13, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- There is an OTRS email received for “File:Auf_den_Punkt!.jpg” but not processed yet, ticket:2020050210000958. --Mussklprozz (talk) 08:02, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Hiermit bestätige ich, Erwin Hilbert, alias Eduard Kratzfuss, dass ich Urheber des Fotos bin und Wikipedia es nutzen darf!
Mfg! Erwin Hilbert — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eduard Kratzfuss (talk • contribs) 08:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Auf_den_Punkt!.jpg” under ticket:2020050210000958. --Mussklprozz (talk) 10:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Kept: OTRS permission accepted. --Ahmadtalk 22:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
How is this a free logo? Fangusu (talk) 00:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, also certainly not own work by uploader as claimed. --Gestumblindi (talk) 11:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
The fish logo is too complex for PD-textlogo The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 11:34, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
No High Resolution image. No metadata. May be copyright violation of original photographer. Suggest to delete. Ranjithsiji (talk) 08:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Red necked falcon.jpg and User:Jkadavoor/Jee's contact with the uploader mentioned there, it's now sufficiently clarified that the uploader is the author of these images. --Gestumblindi (talk) 11:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
No High Resolution image. No metadata. May be copyright violation of original photographer. Suggest to delete. Ranjithsiji (talk) 08:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep See this too. Jee 15:38, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per User:Jkadavoor/Jee's contact with the uploader mentioned in the other discussion, it's sufficiently clarified that the uploader is the author. --Gestumblindi (talk) 11:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
13 Smtfamilygroups (talk) 11:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per CSD G7. --pandakekok9 11:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: procedural close: already speedily deleted. --Gestumblindi (talk) 11:41, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Pandakekok9 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/offbeat/rare-migratory-bird-red-necked-falcon-spotted-in-koottanad--1.4500440, recreation of deleted content Jee 12:08, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Whoops, didn't notice that they are different. They are just too similar... Still Delete though, since there's still significant doubt on the authorship of this file. EXIF is missing, and the fact that this and the link are too similar, we could conclude that this file was taken by the same person on the link I gave, which needs permission. --pandakekok9 12:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Comment Probably the user and the photographer (Birdwatcher and wildlife photographer Shino Jacob captured picture of the rare bird at Koottanad)as mentioned in the newspaper are same. This can be verified through OTRS or some other methods. He is in Facebook and also from Kerala; so I'm trying to contact.. Jee 12:15, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- While you are there contacting him, could you also ask him to consider adding EXIF data to all of his uploads? Thanks, pandakekok9 12:26, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Sure. Jee 12:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Talked; same person. He said that he is processing and uploading images from his mobile phone as no computer access nowadays. Agree to try another tool that will not remove EXIF data. Will try to cross-link his FB and Wikimedia accounts. So Keep. Jee 14:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- He uploaded a new photo with EXIF info. Cross-linked his profile. Have this photo there. Regarding scope, there are only a few records of Falco chicquera from Kerala, and this is the only free licensed photo available. Hope enough. Jee 16:26, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Talked; same person. He said that he is processing and uploading images from his mobile phone as no computer access nowadays. Agree to try another tool that will not remove EXIF data. Will try to cross-link his FB and Wikimedia accounts. So
- Sure. Jee 12:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- While you are there contacting him, could you also ask him to consider adding EXIF data to all of his uploads? Thanks, pandakekok9 12:26, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per User:Jkadavoor/Jee's contact with the uploader, it's sufficiently clarified that the uploader is the author. --Gestumblindi (talk) 11:38, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Due to the file quality (small) and size (large) this looks more like an internet harvest (also strange colors), than own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:27, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: It has full Exif metadata for a Nokia N73 smartphone. The February 2010 date is also fitting this small snow sculpture, and I couldn't find it anywhere else on the web with TinEye or Google's reverse image search. The strange colors might have to do with lower quality of this 2006 smartphone's camera. --Gestumblindi (talk) 11:52, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
Not in-use picture of an unknown person. The Commons is not an online photo album and cannot be a repository for just anything. Ldorfman (talk) 20:05, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 11:47, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
the place was demolished and built on a different location, this image is no longer relevant Jmendez1905 (talk) 21:06, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Actually, pictures of demolished places are particularly relevant, as they show a historical situation. --Gestumblindi (talk) 11:45, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
The file will be deleted seven days. 2605:A000:F68D:8600:88BB:7090:8ED9:5088 19:38, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: no permission. --JuTa 16:29, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
obvious copyvio DHN (talk) 08:08, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Storkk at 08:08, 6 Mai 2020 UTC: Likely copyright violation; see COM:Licensing. If you are the copyright holder, please follow the instructions on OTRS. --Krdbot 13:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Es una foto que se usa con fines publicitarios y no informativos. Jaimelaycock (talk) 03:59, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
Esta es una foto falsa que se usa con fines publicitarios. 190.93.142.186 21:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
No es una foto real, es una foto falsa que usa a wikipedia como medio publicitario. 190.93.142.186 21:29, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: DW, taken from FB, and out of scope. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:26, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
その根拠 ぼやけている 尾井優太 (talk) 10:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Comment From the appearance of the photo, this is definitely not a photo taken in 2020. The date and probably the author and source should be updated with correct information. pandakekok9 10:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 13:39, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
“All Rights Reserved” per source page but uploaded as Creative Commons. Northern Moonlight (talk) 12:12, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio at 16:09, 10 Mai 2020 UTC: Copyright violation: “All Rights Reserved” per source page but uploaded as Creative Commons. --Krdbot 01:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
This logo meets the threshold of originality in China. See Commons:Deletion_requests/File:TikTok_Logo.svg Larryasou (talk) 15:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and former DR. --Túrelio (talk) 14:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
no free lisence. アルトクール (talk) 07:43, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 21:42, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --4nn1l2 (talk) 04:43, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Buidhe as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Source url states that copyright is held by Corbis/Getty. Don't disagree, but this has been in speedy for 3 days which means no one is fully comfortable hitting delete, so let's discuss. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:03, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Is this the discussion place? I am new to Wikipedia and don't know anything about copyrights, i just wanted to point out that this picture does not show homosexual prisoners. It shows prisoners of the Sachsenhausen camp, but we checked the visible numbers on our database and there are no signs for them being homosexual prisoners. It's not impossible of course, but its not what they got deported into the camp for. If you have any questions about this don't hesitate to contact me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VoloSachsenhausen (talk • contribs) 12:50, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- Keep Invalid reason for deletion: Usual copyfraud by Getty as well as by Alamy. Original source might have been the World History Archive where it is titled "Prisoners in the concentration camp at Sachsenhausen, Germany, 19 Dec 1938", nothing about homosexual. worldhistoryarchive.co.uk also claims to hold the copyright, that's funny. --Achim (talk) 17:43, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:14, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:03, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of image. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:03, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from music. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:03, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mail.led.luis (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.
- File:LUIS EDUARDO DÍAZ1-converted.pdf
- File:Seguridad social.jpg
- File:La relación entre seguridad social y gasto social-converted.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:38, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:03, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Ninguna licencia justifica su uso. Viola los derechos de auto. Davidmejoradas (talk) 05:49, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo. --Yann (talk) 13:23, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo. Duplicate. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:06, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Screenshot of non-free content. COM:SS Larryasou (talk) 15:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination Larryasou (talk) 10:21, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Kept: withdrawn nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Steve jaques1 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:37, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:09, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:39, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:09, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:39, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 08:09, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. Used in unapproved draft. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:37, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:51, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
bad upload, try again Mjrmtg (talk) 14:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:51, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Diego Tardón Bragado (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos and document. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.
- File:Coronación Canónica 26 Junio 1955 "Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Arévalo 1.jpg
- File:"Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Arévalo. Antigua procesión.jpg
- File:LIBROS ANTIGUO de cofradía "Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Arévalo.jpg
- File:"Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" De Arévalo. En la ciudad de Ávila, junto a otras vírgenes coronadas de la provincia.jpg
- File:"Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Imagen Antigua con Arévalo, de fondo.jpg
- File:Procesión Antigua "Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Arévalo siglo.jpg
- File:Procesión Antigua "Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Arévalo siglo XX.jpg
- File:Procesión Antigua "Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Arévalo.jpg
- File:Coronación Canónica 26 Junio 1955 "Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Arévalo 2.jpg
- File:Coronación Canónica 26 Junio 1955 "Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Arévalo 0.jpg
- File:Año 1886 "Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Arévalo.jpg
- File:Libro 50 aniversario Coronación Canónica 26 Junio 1955 "Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Arévalo.jpg
- File:Procesión "Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Arévalo.jpg
- File:Coronación Canónica 26 Junio 1955 "Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Arévalo.jpg
- File:Foto Antigua "Nuestra Señora de las Angustias" Arévalo.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:53, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Hassan194920 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 17:53, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Watermarking suggests this is a copyrighted photo Ytoyoda (talk) 00:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - and it infringes on the trophy's copyright. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:07, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Nac Mac Chrome (talk · contribs)
[edit]This illustration does not have permission to publish from Christopher Stryjewski.
Maxinvestigator (talk) 00:39, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:07, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Although the post is labeled as {{Cc-by-4.0}}, the blog's homepage states " 상업적, 이벤트 목적의 가공을 포함한 로고가 크롭되는 모든 2차 가공 금지", which prohibits secondary processing, commercial use, and logo cropping. This contradicts the Creative Commons license, and photos from this blog can not be hosted on Commons.
ƏXPLICIT 00:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:08, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Is it really in the public domain? This site doesn't tell us that the photo is free. Pit rock (talk) 02:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Yes, the picture is almost 100 years old and belongs to CERN, who allow it to be used for non-profit purposes like Wikipedia. Are you honestly concerned that CERN is going to raise a fuss about using a 100 year old photograph on Wikipedia? Do you have anything better to do with your time?
- It seems that this flickr account is meaningless in this case - as quite obviously the picture wasn't taken "around 2000" and the uploader has no any copyrights for this picture. Actually, Yi-fu Li from flickr uploaded many archive pictures with false copyright claims and false date. For example there is a picture of signature of Chopin (died in 1849) also marked as a copyrighted by uploader work made around 2000 :-) But still - there is a question when, where and by whom the picture of Pauli was really taken... Polimerek (talk) 09:40, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
- I've contacted with Jens Vigen from Swiss CERN organization who also sent follow up mails to Niels Bohr Institute representatives. In conclucion: “the three institutions holding a physical copy of the photograph, CERN/the Pauli Archives, the Niels Bohr Archive, and AIP’s Emilio Segrè Visual Archives, all assert that they have no objections against a Creative Commons License”. The license reffered to in quotation intented to be CC-BY 4.0. I’ve asked mr. Jens Vigen, as he is a Wikimedia contributor, to put the proper license within the
image site– he’s put on the website with the original photo / I’ve put here, next to the WM Commons picture--Pit rock (talk) 03:16, 14 May 2020 (UTC). Special thanks to @Polimerek: who put the right course in action. Hope this will be enough. --Pit rock (talk) 15:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC)- I've edited the page and changed the license to {{CC-BY-4.0}} (from {{PD-US}}) as we can read on the CERN site (above the picture). Many thanks to Jens Vigen from CERN did the whole work and research. Now the case can be closed. --Pit rock (talk) 18:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:09, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
I tagged this image for speedy deletion because "USPS works are not in the public domain. See Compendium Of U.S. Copyright Office Practices § 313.6(C)(1) (3d ed. 2017)." User:Galendalia removed the tag, saying "Removed statement about it being a violation for numerous reasons, it is not copyrighted, it is a registered trademark, USPS is an independent agency". I still believe that I was correct.
USPS is an independent agency, but it is one whose works can be copyrighted. See Compendium Of U.S. Copyright Office Practices § 313.6(C)(1) (3d ed. 2017) ("Works prepared by officers or employees of the U.S. Postal Service... are not considered works of the U.S. government."); see also H.R. Rep. No. 94-1476, at 60 (1976) ("In accordance with the objectives of the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, this [prohibition on copyrighting Federal works] does not apply to works created by employees of the United States Postal Service.") Things can be both copyrighted and trademarked. And not only is the "eagle" design copyrightable, but it appears to actually have been accepted for registration by the Copyright Office (no. VA000130031). Mdaniels5757 (talk) 03:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- I do not accept the argument being proposed for the following reasons:
- According to USPS, it has given permission for its logo to be used in educational releases (see https://about.usps.com/doing-business/rights-permissions/fair-use-exceptions.htm). Also, if this has to be deleted then all versions of their logo and everyone else’s has to be deleted.
- It is their logo and according to Wikipedia itself, logos may be used in accordance with the respective articles. This file was uploaded since it is one of many variations of its logo and is being used in creating pages related to USPS.
- Only the stamps of USPS are copyright works. The logo is a registered trademark for the USPS. The referenced articles by User:Mdaniels5757 also state only the USPS stamps are copyrighted. The logo copyrighted he/she expresses can only be one of two logos in which they have the copyright to which is the Express Mail® Logo and the Priority Mail® Logo (per https://about.usps.com/doing-business/rights-permissions/logo-trademark-usage.htm) in which you need permission to use and must pay a fee. You also cannot use their logos for profit or other certain items as listed on the page linked previous this sentence.
- Wikipedia identifies itself as being a one source educational stop for all of humanity and just a mere search of the internet for “USPS logo” will yield hundreds of results and images depicting not only the file I uploaded but other variations as well as previous versions (including inside Wikipedia articles themselves).--Galendalia (talk) 05:30, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Fair use media is not allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If this DR results in deletion, this logo can be moved to the English Wikipedia, which allows fair use. However, this logo might be below COM:TOO, so this might not be copyrightable. pandakekok9 06:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Never mind, this logo is complex enough to be copyrightable. This should have been speedily deleted. --pandakekok9 06:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep The logo should be allowed and is used all over Wikipedia including on the actual USPS Wikipedia entry. This is the actual version with colors in which they have many. It is not copyrighted from anything I can find online and no one has yet to prove that it is copyrighted. I have given it the proper credits and templates on the page. In H.R. Rep. No. 94-1476, at 60 (1976) it states specifically “The intent of section 105 is to restrict the prohibition against Government copyright to works written by employees of the United States Government within the scope of their official duties. In accordance with the objectives of the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, this section does not apply to works created by employees of the United States Postal Service. In addition to enforcing the criminal statutes proscribing the forgery or counterfeiting of postage stamps, the Postal Service could, if it chooses, use the copyright law to prevent the reproduction of postage stamp designs for private or commercial non-postal services (for example. in philatelic publications and catalogs, in general advertising, in art reproductions, in textile designs, and so forth). However, any copyright claimed by the Postal Service in its works, including postage stamp designs, would be subject to the same conditions, formalities, and time limits as other copyrightable.” (If you are going to quote something please use the entire quote and not just a partial that shows your stand).
- The use of the logo is public domain by law as it is a work of the federal government as defined in Compendium Of U.S. Copyright Office Practices § 313.6(C)(1) (3d ed. 2017).
- Furthermore after searching through the copyright database using the ID the first user used, it does not come up with anything by the USPS but if I search by name, it comes up with over 600 pages of which 98% of them are stamps (others are their newsletters, zip code book, internally used manuals).
- Galendalia (talk) 10:55, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Galendalia: The database is weird, but here is a link to the entry to which I was referring: [1]. Mdaniels5757 (talk) 15:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Mdaniels5757: Thank you for that, however, the rest of what I stated still stands. As it is public domain as part of the US Government. Galendalia (talk) 18:26, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Mdaniels5757: I would encourage you to visit https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Service where you will see a variation of the logo being used as fair use. Galendalia (talk) 18:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
-
- @Mdaniels5757: I understand that, so it seems like you are basically saying we should not have any USPS pictures on Wikipedia? Since they own the rights to all of their items, this includes packing boxes, vehicles, collection boxes (anything that displays their logo)? Would this not go for UPS, Amazon, etc. since all of those companies have trademarked/copyrighted logos as well on Wikipedia?
- @Galendalia: Amazon's logo is probably below the threshold of originality, and an image of its logo had a deletion request declined on that basis (I'm not aware of anything involving UPS, and to me its logo is probably close to the line of what's copyrightable). I think that this logo is copyrighted, not freely licensed, and therefore cannot be hosted on Wikimedia Commons. Similar images that uses non-free works (except de minimis usage) should be deleted for the same reasons. Note that English Wikipedia allows fair use, and if this image is deleted from Wikimedia Commons, it will go there instead. Mdaniels5757 (talk) 20:27, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Mdaniels5757: Can you just go ahead and move it there then so we can end this discussion? --Galendalia (talk) 20:45, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete not simple enough and USPS works are copyright. A similar logo on the enwiki w:File:United States Postal Service Logo.svg is a non-free image used in the infobox of the article about the organisation. Ww2censor (talk) 17:31, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - It is perfectly clear that all works of the USPS have a copyright. Commons does not accept works that are only for educational use or need a "fair use" argument. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:12, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Copyrighted package. Solomon203 (talk) 06:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:15, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
copyrighted package. Solomon203 (talk) 06:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:15, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
Copyrighted package. Solomon203 (talk) 06:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:15, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
COM:DW of the mural, which is presumed copyright- it's not covered by our graffiti rules because it appears to have the permission of the pub. Rodhullandemu (talk) 07:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:17, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
_%EC%84%A4%ED%99%94%EC%88%98_%ED%94%8C%EB%9E%98%EA%B7%B8%EC%8B%AD_%EC%8A%A4%ED%86%A0%EC%96%B4.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_%EC%84%A4%ED%99%94%EC%88%98_%ED%94%8C%EB%9E%98%EA%B7%B8%EC%8B%AD_%EC%8A%A4%ED%86%A0%EC%96%B4.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
no FOP in South Korea – Kwj2772 (talk) 07:10, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
_설화수_플래그십_스토어.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:17, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
_설화수_플래그십_스토어.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unused personal photo, out of project scope. Uploader is himself depicted and this is not a selfie, copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 07:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:18, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope Estopedist1 (talk) 13:03, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:20, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
image used only by promotional page deleted off enwiki DS (talk) 14:50, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Also applies to File:Kevin L. Ramos.jpg. DS (talk) 14:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:37, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
tiny, nearly invisible logo, with gibberish metadata - i'm fairly sure this is not within project scope DS (talk) 14:34, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:10, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Encik Tekateki as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: F10 Personal photos. Not the best quality photo but I'd say in scope. See w:Michael Stout. Jonteemil (talk) 12:03, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion, in scope. (non-admin closure) --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 19:55, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
No evidence image is property of uploader. Image is available on other websites. TJMSmith (talk) 04:37, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Non-free_content#Images_2 : "For some retired or disbanded groups, or retired individuals whose notability rests in large part on their earlier visual appearance, a new picture may not serve the same purpose as an image taken during their career, in which case the use would be acceptable."
Deleted: per nomination. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:50, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
copyright violation https://www.facebook.com/MIKYMERISIPHOTOCLUB/photos/ms.c.eJwzNDO1MDM1NrI0N7E0MDA10zOECBiYGVgYGZsYGsMFTCECJgAEFgoj.bps.a.1658652937490092.1073742114.241629212525812/1658653297490056/?type=3&theater Theroadislong (talk) 14:18, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
@Theroadislong: Hallo, I asked the owner of the copyright to send the email to give permission to use it and he just told me he did. this is the ticket they gave him: Ticket#: 2020042510004351 --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 14:34, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- There is an OTRS email received for “File:Carlo_Masi.jpg” but not processed yet, ticket:2020042510004351. Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 16:50, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: OTRS approved. (non-admin closure) --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 19:56, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
unused, uncategorized. Explanation too fuzzy. Word "meeskonnavorm" means in Estonian 'a team kit'. Also note that same is: File:Meeskonnavorm6.png, but it is categorized
- File:Meeskonnavorm5.png
- File:Meeskonnavorm4.png
- File:Meeskonnavorm3.png
- File:Meeskonnavorm 2.png
- File:Meeskonna Vorm 1.png
Estopedist1 (talk) 09:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:06, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
User's only contributions to any project are to upload selfies and write this autobiography on his user page. Out of scope. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 08:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep: I'M AGF per en:Special:Contributions/Ashfaq_Fazal. Last edit more than 3 months ago. Images are deleted, so let him go, that's not a severe case here on Commons. --Achim (talk) 19:13, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
Kept: per Achim. --JuTa 20:55, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Copyvio. 2.104.86.226 11:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete: facebook, fandom --Achim (talk) 11:56, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 07:35, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Tiven2240 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Copyvio from internet no permission. However, no URL was provided and google search did not find duplicate image. Please provide the URL of claimed source. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:05, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Dear @Ellin Beltz: kindly have a look at the below links. 1, 2. Thanks and regards --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 05:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Tiven2240: The examples you show are 300 x 200 pixels in size. The one uploaded here is 5,184 × 3,456 pixels, file size: 5.09 MB. Why do you think the smaller ones on the internet did not come from here, and how is it possible that a 300x200px image would be the source of our larger and more detailed image? Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:05, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Maybe COM:OTRS can help. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 18:26, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by Morgankevinj. --Minoraxtalk 07:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely own work, check out that nifty black side border! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:30, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 07:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Copyvio. Trade (talk) 11:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 16:05, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
copyvio, artist died in 1955, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 13:56, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 16:03, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
This picture was obtained from the author (via an email), copyright transferred to the author of the wikipedia page. Please do not delete. I have a higher resolution image if useful. Pseudoenzyme (talk) 18:28, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination; please send permission via OTRS. --Gbawden (talk) 16:03, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Chiko elektriko (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:50, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 16:03, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Chiko elektriko (talk · contribs)
[edit]Official symbols. Proper license tag should be used if in public domain.
- File:H. 17 Ayuntamiento de Tijuana.svg
- File:19 Ayuntamiento de Tijuana.png
- File:20 Ayuntamiento Tijuana.png
- File:21 Ayuntamiento de Tijuana.png
- File:Logo 22 Ayuntamiento Tijuana.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 16:04, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Official symbol. Proper license tag should be used if in public domain.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 16:04, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
- File:Semana santa olula.jpg
- File:Roscos y carretillas olula q.jpg
- File:Fritada de Suflí.png
- File:Plato de cahas 1.png
- File:Centro perez siquier.jpg
- File:Ciudad cultura.jpg
- File:Foto olula del rio bien.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:24, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:05, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Conspiracygradeg (talk · contribs)
[edit]Official documents. Proper license tag should be used if in public domain.
- File:Confirmation of Work Experience on Mr. Lee's Receiving AP and Reaters Tape Part-time job (Published by Kim Myung-sub, head of the international team at the Korean Broadcasting System).jpg
- File:July 14, 2016 Seoul Central District Court (서울중앙지방법원, 형사 17 단독) Judge PARK, Sarang (박사랑 판사님) Natasha Poeschl Special Agent, U.S. Embassy Seoul ARSO-I Office RE Case 2015 Godan 4685 Intimidation (2015 .jpg
- File:July 15, 2015 Mr. KIM, Seong Geun Director General KNPA Foreign Affairs Bureau Natasha M. Poeschl Security Attaché Dear Director General KIM, On July 10, 2015 the U.S. Embassy Seoul became aware of two threats posted to the U.S. Govern.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Judge_PARK,_Sarang_(%EB%B0%95%EC%82%AC%EB%9E%91_%ED%8C%90%EC%82%AC%EB%8B%98)_Natasha_Poeschl_Special_Agent,_U.S._Embassy_Seoul_ARSO-I_Office_RE_Case_2015_Godan_4685_Intimidation_(2015_.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 16:04, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
out of scope, blurry photo noneducational 73.92.132.7 18:03, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: Its a decent photo. --Gbawden (talk) 16:05, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Size would appear this has been copied from Facebook. No camera metadata. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 16:05, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
By size this appears to be copied from Facebook. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 16:05, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
unused, uncategorized, probably out of scope Estopedist1 (talk) 18:05, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 16:05, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Text table, with no source. Were this needed in project, it could be recreated in text. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 16:06, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ph awesome (talk · contribs)
[edit]Utterly no indication of own work on any of these logos, or the old photo, which might be old enough to be kept with a proper source.
- File:Miss Global Philippines logo.png
- File:MU Philippines logo.jpg
- File:Mutya Pilipinas logo.png
- File:Miss Philippines Earth logo.png
- File:Miss World Philippines logo.png
- File:Miss Universe Philippines logo.jpg
- File:1908 carnival queen of the orient.png
Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 16:06, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ph awesome (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:22, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 03:18, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
File size & transmission data in meta strongly suggests this is harvested & not own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:30, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 16:06, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
duplicate upload SecretName101 (talk) 06:58, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Speedy delete Marked file as duplicate of File:March18.J27.UFPJ.WDC.27jan07.jpg. --pandakekok9 10:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Anatoliy (talk) 17:40, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
created with intent to defame subject DHN (talk) 07:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Anatoliy (talk) 17:40, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
obvious copyvio DHN (talk) 07:42, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Anatoliy (talk) 17:40, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
obvious copyvio DHN (talk) 07:42, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Anatoliy (talk) 17:40, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Files uploaded by User:БесПаники773
[edit]- File:НАШ ВАШ ВЫБОР.jpg — author is Dmitry Loktev, source — © Константин Кинчев. But description — "own work". No permission. Lesless (talk) 10:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- File:А. ВДОВИЧЕНКО.jpg — author is Valery M.Potapov (other, than of the first file), no permission. Lesless (talk) 10:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- File:Павел с сыном.jpg — doubts about authorship: no metadata, low resolution.
- File:Группа "Что ЕщЁ.jpg — doubts about authorship: no metadata, low resolution, logo.
- File:Группа "PZ3o".jpg — doubts about authorship: no metadata, low resolution.
- File:Павел Зелицкий.jpg — doubts about authorship: no metadata, low resolution.
- File:ПАВЕЛ ЗЕЛИЦКИЙ в 2 годика.jpg — doubts about authorship: 1992, but the author the same? Lesless (talk) 10:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Anatoliy (talk) 17:41, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
newer version exists at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:XNU_v2.svg Hongsy (talk) 12:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Anatoliy (talk) 17:43, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
newer version exists at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:XNU_v2.svg Hongsy (talk) 12:15, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Anatoliy (talk) 17:43, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Described on Commons solely as "Hey guys", this image was uploaded to support an autobio of a non-notable "college" football (soccer) player. The article itself was marked as a speedy delete by another user, and deleted by me. Nick Moreau (talk) 12:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Anatoliy (talk) 17:43, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Derivative work of anime Sword Art Online. Yasu (talk) 15:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Anatoliy (talk) 17:44, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
_(NKVD).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(NKVD).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
It cannot be of 1926 NeoLexx (talk) 22:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
_(NKVD).jpg){kind=link}
This is a cut off of File:Vassily Blokhin.jpg and the later is free as made at 1926 (so it's marked). But Blokhin has all his decorations including the one of 1945 - so this is the earliest year. If it still remains free then sorry, I'm ready to roll back this request. --NeoLexx (talk) 22:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
_(NKVD).jpg){kind=link}
- Please roll back this deletion request and start a new one for File:Vassily Blokhin.jpg, because only there you have found the ridiculous date 1926. Mutter Erde (talk) 03:53, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Technically it doesn't matter: because this image is merely a cut from File:Vassily Blokhin.jpg (see right). Namely (see File history) "Откадрированы награды, которых он лишён" ("Framed out decorations they took away from him").
- So either both photos are free, or both are not. By "ready to roll back" I meant some missed arguments why these photos are free as currently listed.
- I guess the most proper way would be to DR both photos at once with a single page but I never did bulk DR request before so not sure how to do it. PlanespotterA320 might advise? --NeoLexx (talk) 10:07, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, but this photo has to be deleted. Photos from Russian official archives are not public domain by default, and based on the medals in the photo, it is impossible for the photo to have been CREATED before the cutoff date, much less published in a manner as required early enough. There is no evidence it meets Commons standards for being public domain. There is no way this photo was taken anytime around 1926 - it could not have been taken before 1945!--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:37, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Unlikely to be PD-URAA compliant, as Russia had 50 year copyright term as of the URAA date and there is no indication that this was published before 1946. Buidhe (talk) 09:55, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Unknown copyright status. Better photo available. --Anatoliy (talk) 17:45, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
_(NKVD).jpg){kind=link}
Statues, even in form of gravestones, are not permitted by COM:FOP#Japan. Aoki died in 2008 so copyright for the statue should be in effect. Yasu (talk) 15:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 06:48, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
No location data, very low quality, no realistic educational value Kissa21782 (talk) 21:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 11:35, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Maybe copyright packaging. COM:PACKAGING Larryasou (talk) 15:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC) Also:
- File:鸿福堂夏枯草.JPG
- File:Megurhythm Steam Eye Mask 花王蒸汽眼罩.jpg
- File:Yanjing Beers-99 Ranch Market.jpg
- File:58度金门高粱.jpg
- File:金门高粱酒限量版.jpg
- File:My Beauty Diary.jpg
- File:Wanglaoji 310ml.jpg
- File:Wanglaoji 500ml.jpg
- File:Jiaduobao Gold Can in Canada.jpg
- Delete - agree enough there to constitute a copyrightable design - MPF (talk) 14:18, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:23, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
No source for basemap or data. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Support I support the deletion request. It is clear looking at the file history that there is no source for the data. Based on my own assertions, the data looks to be quite old, as now the larger outbreaks of COVID-19 have been in Europe, not Asia. I also question whether this is the user's own work. Bibeyjj (talk) 15:39, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:22, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Dead link, dubious own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:24, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
No source, no apparent own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:24, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
The ghostly white overprinting at top strongly suggests that this is not own work, but something harvested from internet. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:34, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:24, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Copyvio : https://www.google.com/search?tbs=sbi:AMhZZiuL4aZRFVq4ZgHffEWLtJt2zGyowPnwCmzxK25vRSaPLbliZHnQiT5KyZwYSexusG2WoLdD9zRqucaUxDlZuMhKcaNGGi4Wnhop6MhOvhGonhrt1vLGeoJng-8haT_1-iw6khr8DmR08_1sLx4nglM_1Q_1OaWebjLA4X_1Og0sU8ENSOCQ25PauWlQg5OPTC32xOEuwWzl7IkZsPMJwZfzkR62IEq29ez_1ZpO6YwD95FUk7laSTVU7EBO6SvChaUl-9ZZpV2JE6i_1cNr7TJxDT--B1id4QbfMx7w3IU2pk9pOFcmBl1-wn-iHv0NwoXODi-RCJ_1bmwgep6eGvuLKH2IQABRSGdsOQ GuillaumeG (talk) 19:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:25, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
File:The Merchant's Mansion (1851), the first city telephone station was opened here (Minina st., 4) - panoramio.jpg
[edit],_the_first_city_telephone_station_was_opened_here_(Minina_st.,_4)_-_panoramio.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_the_first_city_telephone_station_was_opened_here_(Minina_st.,_4)_-_panoramio.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
it is low-res copy of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Minina_4_from_the_left.jpg Bestalex (talk) 21:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 07:25, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
This picture seems to be copied from the Internet, but I can only find a similar one.[2] Larryasou (talk) 11:10, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Matching results on TinEye. Unlikely to be own work. --pandakekok9 11:40, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --shizhao (talk) 06:56, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FOP on derivative works based on The Simpsons, such as the decoration on the wall. George Ho (talk) 19:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 06:28, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Hoax. Used in a elaborated vandalism in esWP. Jacinto Segura has no book named like that (in Spanish, Russian or English). The draw is modern. The source (it's broken. The search Jacinto Segura + navaja shows only one result. Ganímedes (talk) 00:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Actually, the name of the user who uploaded the file is the same that the man who was vandalized (ticket:2020042210008601). --Ganímedes (talk) 00:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:09, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
Unused personal photo. Solomon203 (talk) 06:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep This image is in mainspace use on zh.wikipedia. AshFriday (talk) 00:21, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Not used anywhere. Pictures without camera details tend to be suspect. We require a very much better declaration of source and/or permissions. See COM:OTRS. Potential copyright violation Timtrent (talk) 21:50, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
copyviol (the journalist is dead -70 years) Frullatore Tostapane (talk) 22:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:12, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ruthven as no permission (No permission since) Talmoryair (talk) 23:19, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:12, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
to enable upload of a white ship symbol indicated by the "s" in the filename; see File:Chess sdt45.svg, File:Chess sgt45.svg, File:Chess srt45.svg, File:Chess syt45.svg Shlomo (talk) 23:25, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep keep it's part of the set defined on Template:SVG chess pieces and is used already on articles. Also part of same defined set and in use on English Wikipedia by module en:Module:Chessboard mxn KylieTastic (talk) 08:45, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:11, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
derivative work from copyrighted materials DHN (talk) 08:46, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:44, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of scope, in accordance with w:Draft:Julan Shirwod Nueva. Cited basis: "...in its current form it (Draft) serves only to promote or publicise an entity, person, product, or idea, and would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic...." However, I also took note of the subject's insufficient notability. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:52, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:44, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
copyvio youtube RoBri (talk) 09:43, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Out of project scope, should be in wikitext if useful. pandakekok9 10:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:48, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
copyvio, contemp. artworks (church built in 1967) no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 13:58, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:48, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
copyvio, artist died in 2009, no fop Martin Sg. (talk) 14:08, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Das Kunstwerk steht im öffentlichen Raum (im Bürgerzentrum von Gröbenzell). Es befindet sich nicht im Privateigentum, es gehört der Gemeinde Gröbenzell. Ich denke Kunstwerke im öffentlichen Raum dürfen fotographiert werden. In Deutschland besagt die "Kunst-am-Bau-Richtline", dass mindestens 1% der Bausumme für Kunstobjekte (wie diese Steinknospe) ausgegeben werden muss. Diese Objekte sind also aus Steuermitteln finanziertes Gemeingut, das die öffentliche Baulandschaft "schmücken" soll. Also denke ich, gibt es keinen Grund das Bild zu löschen. --Richard Huber (talk) 15:03, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Der Innenraum eines Bürgerzentrums gilt in Deutschland nicht als öffentlich im Sinne der Panoramafreiheit. --Martin Sg. (talk) 15:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Hm, da heißt es: "§ 59 UrhG – Werke an öffentlichen Plätzen, (1) Zulässig ist, Werke, die sich bleibend an öffentlichen Wegen, Straßen oder Plätzen befinden, ..." Durch dieses Bürgerzentrum führt ein öffentlicher Weg, vom Rathaus auf die Hauptstraße. Das könnte man zumindest so sehen. --Richard Huber (talk) 21:26, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Klarer Fall: Innenraum! Martin Sg. (talk) 10:40, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 14:48, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Duplicate of existing image: File:Flickr - Government Press Office (GPO) - THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE LAUREATES FOR 1994 IN OSLO..jpg Triggerhippie4 (talk) 03:19, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
_-_THE_NOBEL_PEACE_PRIZE_LAUREATES_FOR_1994_IN_OSLO..jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 17:14, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
existing image(File:Emperor Showa & Empress Kojun 1956-11.jpg) RSSFSO (talk) 05:18, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: different image. --Krd 17:15, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
This may be too complex for PD-textlogo The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:20, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- According to Title 17 of the United States Code, section 1302:
Designs not subject to protection
Protection under this chapter shall not be available for a design that is— [...]
(2) staple or commonplace, such as a standard geometric figure, a familiar symbol, an emblem, or a motif, or another shape, pattern, or configuration which has become standard, common, prevalent, or ordinary;
(3) different from a design excluded by paragraph (2) only in insignificant details or in elements which are variants commonly used in the relevant trades;
(4) dictated solely by a utilitarian function of the article that embodies it;
- The logo is two human icons (like File:User icon 1.svg but even simpler) and some small caps text. · • SUM1 • · (talk) 08:14, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: borderline case, I'm saying kept on this one. --Krd 17:17, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Woman on the picture would prefer to see this image deleted + no real interest for Commons --Benoît (d) 14:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Françoise sent me an email today asking for deletion. ----Benoît (d) 14:15, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Support deletion. ----Benoît (d) 14:15, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Keep File is in use on a siter project (yes, Wikidata is as much a sister project as Wikipedia per our scope rules). Removing the image on WIkidata should be left up to the WIkidata cmmunity, but since this is the only picture of this person, I doubt they would be inclined to do so (but left up to them). --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 14:30, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- The woman on the picture has a sensibility (like everybody): she is sad to see this picture on Wikicommons (I would prefer to keep the image but I respect that). The entry Wikidata was only created (by me) to link with the wd entry (I also created) of her interview. She is not famous. The picture was not taken in a public place (conference etc.) but in her kitchen. I don't understand the interest to keep...(except if the idea is enforcing the rules strictly)...----Benoît (d) 14:40, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Question Under what original purpose did you upload this photo? I don't see an article on her ever having existed on English or French Wikipedia, and she might not meet the Wikidata notability policy. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:03, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Actually there was not special reason to upload this picture except a kind of illustration of the radio show. I will no longer upload this kind of picture (basically people not notable) because there is a risk to not understand precisely implications (my fault probably in explanations) and -at the end, I'm in an uncomfortable situation with Françoise. There is the rule and the spirit of the rule and apparently this is the first option that can be retained. ----Benoît (d) 15:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nom as out of COM:SCOPE, only use is on a Wikidata page that was created by the author but should not have been. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- The existence of being in use on a Wikidata item is the definition of being in use and in scope. If you believe the Wikidata item should be deleted, nominate that first. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 19:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Can it really be considered "used" on Wikidata though? Unlike regular projects, both Commons and Wikidata primarily serve as sources of raw content and are not really final products. COM:SCOPE was written long before the existence of Wikidata, and I believe that use solely on Wikidata is just like use solely on Commons and is against the spirit of the condition "in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation". -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Take it to RfC. It is current policy that use on
mainspace pagesa non talk/user page on all projects equal COM:INUSE. If Wikidata wants the item to still exist, then we should not make editorial decisions ot delete the image, only due to e.g. copyright should we then delete the image. Courtesy deletions should not be done if the image is in use. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 20:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)- I have to agree with Jonatan Svensson Glad. Regardless of the fact that COM:SCOPE was written long before the existence of Wikidata, it is the current policy. And the policy, in its current wording, does define the image as in-use. --Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 20:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict) I believe that there a current (kind of stale) discussion on this question of COM:SCOPE and Wikidata -- Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard#OTRS & Wikidata. --Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 20:20, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- What that shows is that there is no consensus on whether COM:SCOPE applies to Wikidata; as Vituzzu says, "Wikidata rather than using images catalogues them." Hence it is not current policy because there is substantial disagreement about what "in use" actually means and whether Wikidata qualifies as "in use". Until that is clarified we will have to make independent determinations from best principles and common sense. This is a person who clearly doesn't want her photo online, and the photo does not have any realistic use on any actual project page. If some page gets created in the future on her we can always restore this image. But currently, the continued existence of this image is causing harm to a real-life individual, while only the argument in favor of it is technical compliance with one particular reading of policy which may not even be accurate. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- A question; If Wikidata said that they really want to keep their page about the person and wish to have a freely licensed image on the page. Would they need to upload the image locally then, since we don't view their project pages as "real"? There is a reason we are referred to as the project's media repository. Saying that this is "particular reading of policy which may not even be accurate" is completely reprehensible logic to me. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 21:31, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- To be clear, I'm not advocating for the image to be kept or deleted. The WikiData page does not seem to be only cataloguing the image, but it is clearly being used on the page. Furthermore, the Commons description page lists the Wikidata page under "File usage on other wikis" and more specifically "Usage on www.wikidata.org". A clear black letter reading of the policy and the usage of the word "usage" on the file description page means that it qualifies as "in use" per COM:SCOPE. If continued existence of this image is causing harm to a real-life individual, then we should seek to remove the image (1) by requesting the deletion of the WikiData item, which would (2) allow for the deletion of the image. --Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 21:20, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- And I would be happy to do the requesting on WikiData, but I would require help in formulating a valid rationale for deletion on that project. --Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 21:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- What that shows is that there is no consensus on whether COM:SCOPE applies to Wikidata; as Vituzzu says, "Wikidata rather than using images catalogues them." Hence it is not current policy because there is substantial disagreement about what "in use" actually means and whether Wikidata qualifies as "in use". Until that is clarified we will have to make independent determinations from best principles and common sense. This is a person who clearly doesn't want her photo online, and the photo does not have any realistic use on any actual project page. If some page gets created in the future on her we can always restore this image. But currently, the continued existence of this image is causing harm to a real-life individual, while only the argument in favor of it is technical compliance with one particular reading of policy which may not even be accurate. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Take it to RfC. It is current policy that use on
- Can it really be considered "used" on Wikidata though? Unlike regular projects, both Commons and Wikidata primarily serve as sources of raw content and are not really final products. COM:SCOPE was written long before the existence of Wikidata, and I believe that use solely on Wikidata is just like use solely on Commons and is against the spirit of the condition "in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation". -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- The existence of being in use on a Wikidata item is the definition of being in use and in scope. If you believe the Wikidata item should be deleted, nominate that first. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 19:11, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Actually there was not special reason to upload this picture except a kind of illustration of the radio show. I will no longer upload this kind of picture (basically people not notable) because there is a risk to not understand precisely implications (my fault probably in explanations) and -at the end, I'm in an uncomfortable situation with Françoise. There is the rule and the spirit of the rule and apparently this is the first option that can be retained. ----Benoît (d) 15:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Info I have requested the deletion of the WikiData: wikidata:Wikidata:Requests for deletions#Q64787806. Regards, --Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 22:06, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi, the wikidata entry is now deleted. ----Benoît (d) 09:55, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete As the Wikidata item has been deleted (wikidata:Wikidata:Requests for deletions#Q64787806), the file is now COM:NOTUSED per COM:SCOPE. --Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS). 16:23, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
@Nat: Thanks a lot Nat. ----Benoît (d) 16:36, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per discussion. --Krd 17:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
File:Niveau d'abandon scolaire précoce chez les enfants autochtones nés dans un autre pays de l'UE+ et enfants nés en dehors de l'UE+, par pays de résidence.png
[edit]
Copy from page 9 of https://data2.unhcr.org/en/documents/download/71202 86.249.238.219 14:15, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Info: Citing source site: "UNHCR website is made available by UNHCR for personal use and educational purposes only. Extracts of the information in this website may be reviewed, reproduced or translated for research or private study but not for sale or for use in conjunction with commercial purposes." --Achim (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 17:20, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Not Applicable Piyushboghani2003 (talk) 06:22, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: incomprehensible request. --Krd 14:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation Veverve (talk) 18:14, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 15:45, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- I could transfer it to the german page Norbert Michael Meenen, as he is one of the authors of this interesting scientific project.--Nomen49 (talk) 18:19, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 04:14, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
File:Remoção de iões metálicos na água de produção (de petróleo) usando a casca e a vagem de Moringa Oleifera Lam.pdf
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:40, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello Eugene,
I don't understand why did you nominated my file to be deleted. I think that I am in compliance with the rules. Could you please clarify it to me?
Thank you in advance, Helena JOSÉ — Preceding unsigned comment added by HelenaFJOSE (talk • contribs) 16:29, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 04:14, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
bad file format. Same as File:Pedro de Peralta vector.svg Estopedist1 (talk) 18:21, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 04:13, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
licence does not seem compatible with Commons Veverve (talk) 19:42, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- This drawing is taken from a site (http://getdrawings.com/baptism-drawing#baptism-drawing-1.jpg) that specifies that this particular drawing is published under CC BY-NC 4.0 Licence. Please check and remove your suppression request. Best regards,Pensées de Pascal (talk) 07:12, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- I took alook at the licence page and you are right. Sorry! Veverve (talk) 09:20, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Per nominator, it shouldn't be deleted. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 06:22, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- I took alook at the licence page and you are right. Sorry! Veverve (talk) 09:20, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. CC BY-NC 4.0 is incompatible with Commons. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 04:12, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation Veverve (talk) 18:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:57, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
DSS images are copyright: http://gsss.stsci.edu/SkySurveys/SkySurveys.htm Lithopsian (talk) 19:05, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:57, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
The file will be deleted 2605:A000:F68D:8600:88BB:7090:8ED9:5088 22:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion Buidhe (talk) 10:01, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
La licence indiquée sur Flickr semble incompatible : Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-SA 2.0) Claude Truong-Ngoc (talk) 09:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- @Ctruongngoc: license review still looks good today, please elaborate what is the problem with the file. --Krd 14:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:46, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Commons:Derivative works from music. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:29, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Couldn't we just remove sound instead of deleting this interesting video ? --Ji-Elle (talk) 08:53, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
- Please read terms of use carefully. There are limitations incompatible wit Commons:Licensing. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- Such as? The only thing I see that might be an issue is a restriction on re-distributing the music by itself without using it in a video, but that isn’t the case here. clpo13(talk) 21:51, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- By downloading music from this library, you agree that you will not: Make available, distribute or perform the music files from this library separately from videos and other content into which you have incorporated these music files (e.g., standalone distribution of these files is not permitted). Use music files from this library in an illegal manner or in connection with any illegal content. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 02:14, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- Such as? The only thing I see that might be an issue is a restriction on re-distributing the music by itself without using it in a video, but that isn’t the case here. clpo13(talk) 21:51, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- Please read terms of use carefully. There are limitations incompatible wit Commons:Licensing. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot. I have reuploaded the video with this song Rogue Planet by Kevin Hartnell as background music. Here is the License. Thank you all. Kamboo19 (talk) 17:03, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
- Closing admin: The reupload is at File:Le Transport Lagunaire à Abidjan (STL) réalisé par Bouba Kam's.webm (slightly different capitalization). Storkk (talk) 07:44, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Replaced by version with free-use music. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:47, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
This is a cropped duplicate of File:US-China 7th discussion on trading issue.jpg. The image I am nominating incorrectly states it was taken in 2020 when it was actually taken nearly a year earlier. 1990'sguy (talk) 15:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:47, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:46, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:27, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
possible copyright violation Veverve (talk) 18:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- @Veverve: Why? In my opinion, the book cover design is below COM:TOO. Is there another reason? Ahmadtalk 22:55, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Ahmad252: the picture is very likely not from the uploader, see here and here. Veverve (talk) 23:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks. I agree that the photo is doubtful (no EXIF, small size), but, at least about these two links, I think these aren't the same (different colors of the endband, the slightly different designs, and such minor differences). Ahmadtalk 23:49, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Ahmad252: the picture is very likely not from the uploader, see here and here. Veverve (talk) 23:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:26, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Vladimir Nemirovich-Danchenko
[edit]No indication of early enough PUBLICATION as required for items to the public domain in country of origin (Russia) under Russian law. The sourcing of these is all insufficient - books published after the cut-off date, cached jpgs lacking file information, websites that do not provide the publication information we seek, and even RIA Novosti. None have sufficent sourcing information to meet Commons standards. (Regardless of how old these photos are/whenever they were created, under Russian law they MUST have been published early enough, and there is no indications of early enough publications in these files)
- File:Anton Chekhov reads The Seagull.jpg
- The photo was taken in 1898, by a Russian photographer who died in 1925. Here is an early printout of the photo [3]. It has a caption written in old Russian alphabet, which was abolished in 1917, i.e. the photograph was printed and distributed before 1917. Materialscientist (talk) 07:34, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Doesn't matter how early it was taken. We need early enough PUBLICATION.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Published, e.g., in S.D. Balukhatyi, Chaika v postanovke Moskovskogo Khudozhestvennogo Teatra (Moscow, 1938)[4]. Materialscientist (talk) 12:10, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Withdrawn on that photo. Although that information should have been present in the file description beforehand.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:58, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Published, e.g., in S.D. Balukhatyi, Chaika v postanovke Moskovskogo Khudozhestvennogo Teatra (Moscow, 1938)[4]. Materialscientist (talk) 12:10, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Doesn't matter how early it was taken. We need early enough PUBLICATION.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- The photo was taken in 1898, by a Russian photographer who died in 1925. Here is an early printout of the photo [3]. It has a caption written in old Russian alphabet, which was abolished in 1917, i.e. the photograph was printed and distributed before 1917. Materialscientist (talk) 07:34, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- File:Chaliapin F. (Шаляпин Ф. И.) 1916 with Nemirovich-Danchenko and students.jpg
- File:Grave of Nikolay Gogol 1909.jpg
- File:MAT original company 1899.jpg
- The photo was taken in 1899 in Russia, and re-published abroad in a 1947 book [5], i.e. 70+ years ago, and there was most certainly an earlier publication. Precautionary principle says "where there is significant doubt about the freedom of a particular file, it should be deleted". This is definitely not the case here. Materialscientist (talk) 07:10, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Well then, the 1947 book should be noted clearly, and it should be tagged as PD in Russia but not the US.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- It is noted in the image file. As to all your other replies, I presented evidence of distribution, on this page and in the image files. Per Russian copyright laws and Commons policies, distribution of a photograph is equivalent to publication. Materialscientist (talk) 21:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Your standard of "distribution" is rather vague and unprovable. The burden of proof is on the uploader to clearly prove it meets Commons publication requirements. Expecting users to know about forgotten distributions of a photo that you won't specify any further information about an didn't even mention in file sourcing is propostreous. On Commons we must stand by the clearly established publication dates for precautionary reasons. An item merely being autographed does not render it published under copyright law.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 01:42, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- It is noted in the image file. As to all your other replies, I presented evidence of distribution, on this page and in the image files. Per Russian copyright laws and Commons policies, distribution of a photograph is equivalent to publication. Materialscientist (talk) 21:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Well then, the 1947 book should be noted clearly, and it should be tagged as PD in Russia but not the US.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- The photo was taken in 1899 in Russia, and re-published abroad in a 1947 book [5], i.e. 70+ years ago, and there was most certainly an earlier publication. Precautionary principle says "where there is significant doubt about the freedom of a particular file, it should be deleted". This is definitely not the case here. Materialscientist (talk) 07:10, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- File:Nemirovich detail small.jpg
- See discussion of File:Vladimir Nemirovich-Danchenko 1922.jpg. Materialscientist (talk) 22:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- File:Nemirovich detail.jpg
- See discussion of File:Vladimir Nemirovich-Danchenko 1922.jpg. Materialscientist (talk) 22:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- File:Vladimir Nemirovich Danchenko.jpg
- File:Vladimir Nemirovich Danchenko3 (cropped).jpg
- See below.
- File:Vladimir Nemirovich Danchenko3.jpg
- The uncropped photo (see original upload) was distributed in 1896, which is sufficient for keeping it on Commons. Materialscientist (talk) 05:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- "Distrubited?" Show evidence of your claims. We must know the where and when because copyright rules vary based on location and time. Also, the evidence that it meets standards of early enough publication are quite flimsly. Just because it was signed doesn't mean it was published early enough in line with copyright expiration requirements.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 01:42, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- The uncropped photo (see original upload) was distributed in 1896, which is sufficient for keeping it on Commons. Materialscientist (talk) 05:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- File:Vladimir Nemirovich-Danchenko 1919.jpg
- File:Vladimir Nemirovich-Danchenko 1922.jpg
- The photo was distributed in 1922. Materialscientist (talk) 05:15, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Clarify. By what means? Source just says a 1987 book. That's too late. Can you show the 1922 distribution (ie, leaflet, pamphlet, flyer) and put it in the description?--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- See original upload. Materialscientist (talk) 22:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- File:Vladimir Nemirovich-Danchenko, Late 1930s.jpg
- File:Vladimir Nemirovich-Danchenko2.jpg
- The uncropped photo [6] was signed and distributed in 1898-1899, which is sufficient for keeping it on Commons. Materialscientist (talk) 05:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Clarify. Where was it distributed? What exact date?--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Exact date and place are not essential in this case. Materialscientist (talk) 22:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nope. We must know the where and when because copyright rules vary based on location and time. Also, the evidence that it meets standards of early enough publication are quite flimsly. Just because it was signed doesn't mean it was published early enough in line with copyright expiration requirements. All we know for sure is that it was published in a 1957 book. Everything else is hearsay.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 01:42, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Let me repeat my point: this copy of the photo [7] was signed in 1898-1899 and given to Chekhov. Another print of the same photo [8] (note different background) was exhibited in a museum. So there is evidence of distribution. Materialscientist (talk) 09:22, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- A photo being autographed in private does not equal legal publication. As for the musem display, you should have noted that in the "source" section of the file if you didn't want it to get nominated for deletion. Please include DETAILED, CLEAR, PUBLICATION (where and when) information in your file descriptions. We are not mind readers here. If you don't note the publication, you can't expect other people to know about it.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:56, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Let me repeat my point: this copy of the photo [7] was signed in 1898-1899 and given to Chekhov. Another print of the same photo [8] (note different background) was exhibited in a museum. So there is evidence of distribution. Materialscientist (talk) 09:22, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nope. We must know the where and when because copyright rules vary based on location and time. Also, the evidence that it meets standards of early enough publication are quite flimsly. Just because it was signed doesn't mean it was published early enough in line with copyright expiration requirements. All we know for sure is that it was published in a 1957 book. Everything else is hearsay.--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 01:42, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
- Exact date and place are not essential in this case. Materialscientist (talk) 22:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- Clarify. Where was it distributed? What exact date?--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
- The uncropped photo [6] was signed and distributed in 1898-1899, which is sufficient for keeping it on Commons. Materialscientist (talk) 05:09, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
_1916_with_Nemirovich-Danchenko_and_students.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[7]](http://www.epwr.ru/quotauthor/323/7.jpg){kind=link}
![[8]](https://postfiles.pstatic.net/20110405_254/boycheck_1302000555215m95By_JPEG/SAM_3139.JPG?type=w2){kind=link}
- Delete The creators of them were participats to the Eastern Front wars, and their copyright terms in Russia has extended for more 4 years. Maybe restore-able in 2024. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: Kept those with evidence of actual publication; deleted others. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:30, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Procedural listing. This file was tagged for deletion with the same rationale, but never included in the nomination above. ƏXPLICIT 12:04, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:34, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
