Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2022/04/11
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
![15 File:"Watch Out!".jpg](#File:"Watch_Out!".jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![31 File:Холл центрального офиса МКК "Ваш инвестор" в Новосибирске.jpg](#File:Холл_центрального_офиса_МКК_"Ваш_инвестор"_в_Новосибирске.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(Remscheid).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_в_окружении_отца,_сестёр_и_брата_на_могиле_матери_в_городе_Моздок._28_января_1915_года.jpg){kind=link}
not needed 122.58.212.9 09:16, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Speedy keepPer COM:NOTCENSORED.廣九直通車 (talk) 06:15, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Ruthven (msg) 18:48, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
just delete 47.220.160.56 19:41, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
- Speedy keep per previous DR. Abzeronow (talk) 19:47, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
Keep why we want to delete it. We can use it for erotic and sexy article Đông Minh (talk) 12:30, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion+used. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:55, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
sexual content 97.83.164.180 11:58, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Achim (talk) 12:20, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
sexual content 97.83.164.180 19:57, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
Keep no valid reason for deletion per multiple previous DRs. Just Some Wikipedian (talk) 23:28, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 03:53, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
inappropriate content 197.221.255.141 20:10, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion + in use. --Achim55 (talk) 20:18, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
This is porn 194.233.96.65 06:33, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept. This is not a reason to delete it. Taivo (talk) 10:40, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
The page on American Flags should not depict the American flag as being burned. 98.10.14.94 04:43, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Germany - no flags burning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Russia - no flags burning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_China - no flags burning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_the_United_Kingdom - no flags burning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Ireland - no flags burning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Brazil - no flags burning. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Spain - no flags burning. Quit being openly anit-America or you will never see another measly $3 from me again. 98.10.14.94 04:55, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Burning_flags_by_country ASDFS (talk) 09:25, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Achim55 (talk) 10:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Fmdcpkimd 67.81.186.46 05:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense request. --Achim55 (talk) 10:15, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
I am a sysop on JAWP. This file name is one of female name in Japan. This user added this file to an article of Japanese primary school on JAWP. It may cause an infringement of her privacy. Kurihaya (talk) 07:41, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- {subst:delete2|image=File:鈴木緑夏.jpg|reason=私はJAWPのsysopです。このファイル名は日本の女性名の1つです。このユーザーは、JAWPの日本の小学校の記事にこのファイルを追加しました。それは彼女のプライバシーを侵害する可能性があります。Joker45451919 (talk) 07:45, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, uploader agrees "けしていいですよ". --Achim55 (talk) 13:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by All the usernames are used (talk · contribs)
[edit]Photoshoot pics at low res, very unlikely uploader's own work. File:5GANG mod avion.jpg has been found on band's Facebook page, and File:5GANG cu hainele trupei.jpg displays same clothing and style as in this photoshoot of theirs: https://www.facebook.com/5gang.oficial/photos/2754624471264131
- File:5GANG haine 2.jpg
- File:5GANG mod avion.jpg
- File:5GANG filmări Story.jpg
- File:5GANG haine.jpg
- File:5GANG cu hainele trupei.jpg
Gikü (talk) 14:45, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Promo/press photos. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:26, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Accidentally uploaded the wrong file Jyothi Obillaneni (talk) 16:49, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Fitindia at 17:32, 11 April 2022 UTC: CSD F10 (personal photos out of COM:SCOPE --Krdbot 01:51, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Uploading new image to replace Rikewon (talk) 21:48, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Delete. Likely a copyvio. Has been already published on the internet on multiple sites. If it is your own work you might need to email COM:VRT. --Hulged (talk) 00:10, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 06:05, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Permission by the original author is missing. XenonX3 (talk) 21:55, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- I've just asked for delete it, thanks for notice me. Stv26 (talk) 22:52, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 06:32, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope. User photo of User:Yourtanvir123. Uploaded for the purpose of en:User:Yourtanvir123/sandbox. This user does not have a significant number of edits. Thuresson (talk) 16:43, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 09:34, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Not a notable album or artist, just because it’s free doesn’t mean it’s in scope. Dronebogus (talk) 23:29, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
![23:29, 11 April 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/04/11#c-Dronebogus-2022-04-11T23:29:00.000Z-File:"Watch_Out!".jpg){kind=link}
Ticket:2022041210009661 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 12:00, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jarekt (talk) 15:40, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
![15:40, 13 April 2022 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2022/04/11#c-Jarekt-2022-04-13T15:40:00.000Z-File:"Watch_Out!".jpg){kind=link}
The author uploaded on reddit and although they seem to grant a wikicompliant license, it seems it's reddit license that governs and it doesn't appear to be compliant with cc license Kirham (talk) 19:26, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Disagree: from reddit's is latest revision of the user agreement, the user retains the copyright but grants non-exclusive usage rights to reddit. BouncyCactus (talk) 19:45, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- In particular, see section 5 for the copyright policy of user submitted content, and section 11 which forbids the use of reddit's Materials which are considered separately from user-submitted content BouncyCactus (talk) 19:49, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- However, section 3 seemingly limits what is admissible use for its content which seems conflicting with the CC license. I would ask for the opinion of another user and in the meantime ask the original uploaded if it is possible to acquire the original image via different means. BouncyCactus (talk) 19:55, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Túrelio: , sorry to bother but I often come to you for advice regarding licensing. What is your opinion on this matter? BouncyCactus (talk) 20:01, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep; if there is no (reasonable) doubt that the reddit-posting user is indeed the photographer, then his on-thread release of the image under a CC license is valid. IMO, Reddit is used here only as a platform and its terms are rather irrelevant, as we do not refer to their "license", but to the directly expressed permission by the posting user. --Túrelio (talk) 09:27, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- On this matter, I talked to the photographer, who uploaded the image under the CC-BY-4.0 license on his website. I updated the file page and I would say the deletion request can now be closed even without further input. ---- BouncyCactus (talk) 12:28, 12 April 2022 (UTC), edited 16:09, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Resolved
- Keep Unless the Reddit upload terms include a full copyright assignment, which would likely not even be legal (the author would have to agree in writing), the author retains the right to license their work in any way they want, regardless of any terms of service for the platform. Reddit does grant themselves a pretty gross wide-ranging non-exclusive license for anything people upload (including having authors waive their right for attribution if Reddit wants to use their stuff or allow another company to), but if it's clear the poster does own the copyright, then whatever licenses they grant are fine. It's also available more directly from the author under a free license, so Reddit is moot anyways. Carl Lindberg (talk) 13:56, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep The photographer is identified, there is no reason to delete this image. This deletion request should be closed Jmex (talk) 11:43, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
ok then, seems I misunderstood the conditions. Case closed for me. To be clear: I request withdrawal of this deletion request I’ve opened --Kirham (talk) 17:36, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Withdrawn. --Yann (talk) 17:44, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
I uploaded it by mistake Mdy66 (talk) 12:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio at 13:37, 14 April 2022 UTC: mispelled --Krdbot 19:48, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
Spurious Creative Commons license? Larry Hockett (talk) 16:17, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, as "© 2022 Minute Media - All Rights Reserved.". --Túrelio (talk) 17:25, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Being uploader of the image i request to delete the image Heavyhaul74 (talk) 06:17, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 08:40, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Being uploader of the image i request to delete the image Heavyhaul74 (talk) 06:17, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --GPSLeo (talk) 08:43, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
The source and the license specified is doubtful. The uploader doesn't seem to be the copyright holder of the file. Moreover, it looks like a personal photo and thus out of project scope. Hulged (talk) 00:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete definitely out of scope BouncyCactus (talk) 17:29, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 12:18, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
I ask its deletion for privacy reason. Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 01:18, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep as uploader and “wikipedia volunteer” the terms of CC licenses (irrevocable) must be known to you. (also following 2 pics) --22:38, 11 April 2022 (UTC) Zenwort (talk) 22:38, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- per Commons:Courtesy deletions,
The Wikimedia Foundation urges editors to "[treat] any person who has a complaint about how they are portrayed in our projects with patience, kindness, and respect, and [encourage] others to do the same." Please see wmf:Resolution:Media about living people. We do understand that people make mistakes, change their mind or for other personal reasons desire to have their contributions deleted. Unless the image violates our licensing policy in some manner, or is otherwise illegal in the State of Florida, we are under no legal obligation to delete it. However, administrators are normally sympathetic to well-reasoned removal requests.
- Delete per Commons:Courtesy deletions. The image is not used and can be considered out of scope. BouncyCactus (talk) 17:33, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- delete, there is not really another use for the image + Commons:Courtesy deletions --Isderion (talk) 19:59, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 12:20, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
I ask its deletion for privacy reason. Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 01:19, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per Commons:Courtesy deletions. The image is not used and can be considered out of scope. BouncyCactus (talk) 17:38, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 12:21, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
I ask its deletion for privacy reason. Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 01:19, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete per Commons:Courtesy deletions. The image is not used and can be considered out of scope. BouncyCactus (talk) 17:39, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 12:21, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Someone who is not a Wikipedian Osama Eid (talk) 02:08, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 12:22, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
File:181119 Acara Puncak Road to Shopee 12.12 Birthday Sale, Special Performance dari BlackPink.jpg
[edit]
While the video might have been posted with the appropriate CC license at the time, we'd have to determine if the underlying image was available under a CC license too. According to this Walmart poster, this is a commercial image that I highly doubt that YG (the music label under which Blackpink is signed to) would have released a promo image like this under such license in the first place. Therefore, it wouldn't be valid under the CC license. BriefEdits (talk) 03:02, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 12:23, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, no educational use, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 03:21, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 12:24, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Basquyati as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Image of low relevance
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion. -- Túrelio (talk) 06:59, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Looks relevant to me. --RAN (talk) 22:18, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- keep, educational use is possible --Isderion (talk) 20:01, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Within scope. --IronGargoyle (talk) 12:25, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Self promotion Prince ovy (talk) 07:04, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 12:26, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 10:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 12:29, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
No educational use. Promotilonal article in ruwiki deleted Drakosh (talk) 10:43, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 12:30, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
not used, very poor quality (photographed at night and through window glass), the target article has been deleted Alex Spade (talk) 11:18, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Zenwort (talk) 22:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 12:31, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of project's scope
- File:4Views.JPG
- File:Drawing of a tank.jpg
- File:M-3A1 TD Front.png
- File:M-3A1 TD Side 2.png
- File:M-3A1 TD Side Wireframe.png
- File:M-3A1 TD Side.png
- File:M-3A1 TD top wireframe.png
- File:M-3A1 TD Top.png
- File:M-3A6 - Hectanian manufactured version of the American M-3 Bradley IFV.png
- File:M3A1 Tank Destroyer.jpg
- File:MachGun.jpg
- File:Pers.jpg
- File:Tank Front.jpg
- File:Tank Left.jpg
- File:Tank Right.jpg
- File:Tank Top.jpg
- File:Warhound MBT tech drawing.JPG
Le Petit Chat (talk) 13:30, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 12:53, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Munyaruhengeri Jean Pierre Alpha (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope. Collection of personal photos.
- File:IMG-20210317-WA0017.jpg
- File:MUNYARUHENGERI.jpg
- File:My picture munyaruhengeri.jpg
- File:IMG-20210317-WA0015.jpg
- File:Imge munyaruhengeri.jpg
- File:Munyaruhengeri.jpg
- File:Alpha munyaruhengeri.jpg
- File:Jean pierreAlpha munyaruhengeri.jpg
- File:Map projection.pdf
- File:Exponential map on complex matrices.pdf
Smooth O (talk) 14:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 12:53, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope personal pics. See also en:User:Kiffoiasi.
Gikü (talk) 16:33, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 13:25, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Andrewsopbeli (talk · contribs)
[edit]SD|F10 (personal photos by non-contributors)
JopkeB (talk) 18:27, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 13:25, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ahmedsamih1 (talk · contribs)
[edit]SD|F10 (personal photos by non-contributors)
JopkeB (talk) 18:30, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 13:25, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Complex logo, likely not own work and missing permission. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:22, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:52, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Holiday snap. No encyclopaedic relevance. 62.216.210.62 20:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Agree Delete (also the following four images) Zenwort (talk) 21:58, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per COM:SCOPE. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:50, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Empty hallway. No encyclopaedic relevance. 62.216.210.62 20:11, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per COM:SCOPE. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:50, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Empty hallway. No encyclopaedic relevance. 62.216.210.62 20:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per COM:SCOPE. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:50, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Empty hallway. No encyclopaedic relevance. 62.216.210.62 20:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per COM:SCOPE. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:51, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Empty hallway. No encyclopaedic relevance. 62.216.210.62 20:14, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per COM:SCOPE. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:51, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Personal document with personal information that is inappropriate for Commons. No COM:EDUSE. --Marbletan (talk) 20:15, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:48, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Not uploaders work, see TinEye GeorgHH • talk 21:20, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:47, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE image, only used for vandalism at ro:Augustin Crangas Gikü (talk) 22:17, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:46, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
According to [1] and other news sites this is a photo that's being distributed by Associated Press. Looks like Flickr washing. Stv26 (talk) 22:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- This picture is from 1945, can it be Public Domain in Italy? Stv26 (talk) 22:37, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, It is PD in Italy, and also in the United States because was created before 1976 -79.145.148.64 01:23, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- Also can another user like Richard Arthur Norton confirm this is a valid {{PD-Italy}}? -79.145.148.64 01:29, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep It was taken by the Associated Press according to other versions online, so "PD-US-not renewed". According to the Library of Congress, the AP rarely applied for copyrights, even for their most iconic images, and never renewed any copyrights, the costs would have been staggering for an organization that may distribute 500 photos a day for 100 years. Good detective work, in finding the other copies. --RAN (talk) 02:10, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: PD-Italy. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:45, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio. Dronebogus (talk) 23:46, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:41, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope Dronebogus (talk) 23:47, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:41, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
What even is this? OOS Dronebogus (talk) 23:58, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:40, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Per EXIF, copyright holder is 'photos by www.fecheteionut-fotograf.ro'. No proof of permission. Gikü (talk) 15:18, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:59, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE image of a non notable person – ro:Andrei Sandulescu Gikü (talk) 15:47, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:57, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE image of a non-notable person – ro:Gheorghe Meghișan, ro:Utilizator:Gheorghe Meghișan. Gikü (talk) 15:49, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:58, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Per http://www.sculpture.ro/fisa.php?id=29 sculptor is a living person. Artwork is thus copyrighted with an unknown undelete date. Gikü (talk) 16:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:58, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Artwork by ro:Ion Dumitriu (d. 1998). Undelete in 2069. Gikü (talk) 16:11, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:55, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE image of a non-notable person. Gikü (talk) 16:46, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:54, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE; see also ro:Mihaila ALex Gikü (talk) 17:21, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:54, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE; see ro:Chiu alex Gikü (talk) 17:22, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Danielizer (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of COM:SCOPE images of a non-notable person – ro:Dragoș Săndulache
Gikü (talk) 17:28, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
F10 JopkeB (talk) 18:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by User:Fitindia. --IronGargoyle (talk) 15:52, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
This structure incorrectly has the acetates protonated (presumably computer-generated based on flawed structural heuristics). Per en:Neodymium acetate and standard naming, they are each monoanionic; and per enwiki (uncited) name of "Tetra-μ2-acetatodiaquadineodymium(III) neodymium(3+) triacetate", some are bindentate and it's a cluster of two Nd atoms. Lead-ref doi:10.1016/S0925-8388(98)00449-6 states "acetate ligands act as bridges between two Ln(III) ions...polynuclear chains [rather than] dinuclear structures". DMacks (talk) 03:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I agree that this chemical structure image isn't a correct way to represent this chemical compound. Marbletan (talk) 12:04, 14 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Leyo 19:05, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
The central structure is missing an oxygen atom betwen Mg and the benzylic carbon. Marbletan (talk) 15:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Leyo 19:04, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
The center structure should only have two double bonds in the ring. Marbletan (talk) 15:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination (incorrect structure). --Leyo 19:03, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope Anatoliy (talk) 17:43, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep license correct. Used on ukr WP --Zenwort (talk) 22:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: Per COM:INUSE. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:55, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Lo subí por error Bea.miau (talk) 20:30, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:43, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE image of a non-notable individual - ro:Alexandru-Ionuț Panait Gikü (talk) 22:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:52, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
out of COM:SCOPE image of a non-notable person; self-promo attempt at ro:Francesca Maria Mihalache Gikü (talk) 22:25, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:47, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Tudor Nicola (talk · contribs)
[edit]out of scope fantasy of a non-notable youtuber
- File:National Emblem of East Romania.png
- File:East Romania - fictional country.png
- File:East Romania (fictional country).png
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Gikü (talk) 22:29, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:47, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE image of a non-notable person – ro:STEFANIA / ro:ȘTEFANIA Gikü (talk) 22:41, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:46, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio. Dronebogus (talk) 22:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:45, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Cool. Also out of scope and unlicensed Dronebogus (talk) 23:44, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:14, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
The Instagram crap thought it could escape me by hiding in cat:25, but no such luck. Dronebogus (talk) 23:51, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Per COM:SCOPE. --IronGargoyle (talk) 00:08, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Facebook 191.126.188.130 00:49, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 12:56, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Inaccurate version, I've already uploaded a corrected one. SpaceEconomist192 (talk) 02:47, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Wdwd (talk) 13:00, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
It's not "own work" ShinePhantom (talk) 04:33, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 13:01, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
copyright Cgl02 (talk) 05:02, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 13:01, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Patryk2710 as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://www.ranizow.pl/asp/pl_start.asp?typ=14&menu=15&strona=1&sub=71&subsub=9. Commons upload is from 2019, while the external link is undated. Should be verified which one came first. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:48, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 13:03, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by FDW777 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://www.diomedia.com/stock-photo-black-lace-british-pop-group-back-terry-dobson-left-colin-routh-right-steve-scholey-and-front-image17373690.html. Converting to DR to allow exploration of uploader's claims in the file description. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:49, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Clearly watermarked as diomedia. Gibb2558 (talk · contribs) and Now1234 (talk · contribs) (almost certainly the same person, since Gibb2558 added back Now1234's last upload at 12:17, 10 April 2022, three minutes after it was uploaded at File:Gibb and Barton 1984.jpg) have a long history of deleted images in relation to Black Lace, in particular the repeated deletion of the 1984 image which is credited to John Ridley of the BBC. While they are probably a member of Black Lace as claimed, that doesn't make them the copyright holder of every photo of the band in existence. FDW777 (talk) 07:14, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 13:05, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
personal information added like location which is not to be disclosed Photohelp13 (talk) 06:08, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 13:06, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
personal information added by mistake which is not to be disclosed Photohelp13 (talk) 06:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 13:06, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
fantasy diagram, out of project scope Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 07:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 13:22, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
_(Remscheid).jpg){kind=link}
_(Remscheid).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Photo was taken on private property without permission. 212.184.140.92 07:19, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
_(Remscheid).jpg){kind=link}
- Delete:
Confirmed per File:Rather Straße 50 (3) (Remscheid).jpg and geopos. --Achim55 (talk) 10:47, 11 April 2022 (UTC) - I talk with the Owner, who allows to take picture for wikipedia (cultural heritage monuments in Remscheid). DiAuras (talk) 08:05, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per COM:FOP BouncyCactus (talk) 17:42, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep the building seems to be from 1794, so there there should not be any copyright claims to it. That the photographer entered private property is not a valid reason for deletion --Isderion (talk) 19:57, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
_(Remscheid).jpg){kind=link}
Kept: per User:Isderion: no copyright issue, no valid reason for deletion. --Wdwd (talk) 13:24, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
_(Remscheid).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Photo was taken on private property without permission. 212.184.140.92 07:20, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete: Confirmed per File:Rather Straße 50 (3) (Remscheid).jpg and geopos. --Achim55 (talk) 10:48, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Das Foto wurde mit Erlaubnis des Eigentümer erstellt, der dabei vor Ort war. Ich hatte eine sehr freundliche, längere Unterhaltung mit ihm und er gab mir noch Hinweise auf andere zu fotografierende Baudenkmäler in der Umgebung. Ich verstehe nicht, mit welchem Grund Sie die Behauptung aufstellen und verbreiten, ich hätte ohne Erlaubnis das Foto von Privatgrund aus gemacht. Ich frage in diesen Fällen jedesmal um Erlaubnis. DiAuras (talk) 06:33, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per COM:FOP BouncyCactus (talk) 17:46, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep the building seems to be from 1794, so there there should not be any copyright claims to it. That the photographer entered private property is not a valid reason for deletion --Isderion (talk) 19:58, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per User:Isderion: no copyright issue, no valid reason for deletion. --Wdwd (talk) 13:24, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
I uploaded it by mistake Lê (talk) 07:41, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 13:26, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Less necessary AreaPhoto (talk) 08:40, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 13:26, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
All these files below are supposed to be "own works" created by the user him/herself while visiting foreign countries. Judging by the poor quality of some of the images, it looks like they are screenshots of YouTube videos, which makes the "search by images" option on Google impossible. These files also do not contain any EXIF data to prove his/her claims. I've already asked this user to upload the original files with proper EXIF-information, but every time I try to remind him/her, he/she will try to steer the conversation in a different direction to avoid further questions.
- File:In front of Maidan Nezalezhnosti square.png
- File:Wall of death commemorating those who fell in the Ukraine-Russia conflict (2014-2021).png
- File:A bridge over a lake.png
- File:The old House in Tallinn, Estonia.png
- File:The tree after a snowfall.png
- File:It snows in the evening in Tallinn, Estonia.jpg
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Note: This user has previously uploaded dozens of photos without permission.
LX | Talk 08:56, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete the png extension corroborates User:Lệ Xuân's hypothesis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BouncyCactus (talk • contribs) 17:49, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Clearly false claim of "own works". Nguyentrongphu (talk) 01:24, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 13:28, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
I have upload this file with the promise by the author that he would send an e-mail to OTRS. This has not happened, so feel free to delete this file. It is not being used widely anyhow. Tet (talk) 09:00, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, missing permission. --Wdwd (talk) 13:31, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Uploader's request: EXIF data is missing. I want to exist EXIF data. See also Commons:Courtesy deletions. Ox1997cow (talk) 09:00, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- What do you mean by "I want to exist EXIF data"? --Isderion (talk) 20:03, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Isderion: The camera manufacturer and camera model name are missing from the EXIF data due to incorrect settings in the application. Ox1997cow (talk) 22:53, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- But you could just correct that and then upload a new version of this file --Isderion (talk) 20:44, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Isderion: The camera manufacturer and camera model name are missing from the EXIF data due to incorrect settings in the application. Ox1997cow (talk) 22:53, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 13:32, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Someone who is not a Wikipedian Osama Eid (talk) 02:08, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Alaa :)..! 14:23, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
COM:ADVERT, same goes for the wikidata item (only page containing this file) it is used in Nutshinou Talk! 09:34, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:03, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Not CC-licensed 07 (talk) 09:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 15:03, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Doubtful "own work"-claim, as obviously a screenshot (metadata), Possibly material from Getty Images. -- Túrelio (talk) 09:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete None of the uploads by this user are credible. They have tagged "own work" on screenshots credited to Rob Leiter and Will Wragovic. They should all be deleted. Nohomersryan (talk) 19:25, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP. --Wdwd (talk) 15:05, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Missing permission (image used on the official social media of the event) ManuRoquette (talk) 10:06, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:06, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
El Mundo Theklan (talk) 10:14, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 15:07, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
copyrighted Theklan (talk) 10:16, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 15:07, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This is a picture of the uploader. It has been re-uploaded multiple times. The last admin to delete it was Taivo.
No evidence that the image is under an acceptable free licence. Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather that the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright).
The upload history shows "Uploaded a work by Oduyeru Jeremiah from https://medium.com/@Jonwealth/get-to-know-snazzy-the-optimist-who-represent-the-changing-face-of-nigerian-sounds-230bf987d676 https://www.pulse.ng/entertainment/music/nigerian-star-on-the-rise-snazzy-the-optimist-has-released-his-single-off-his-debut/62bx995 https://www.instagram.com/SnazzyTheOptimist/ https://web.facebook.com/SnazzyTheOptimist?_rdc=1&_rdr"
Obviously the copyright remains with the photographer. 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 10:20, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 15:13, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
copyright infringement 95.31.188.32 10:58, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 15:14, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
doesn't have sources 2601:201:8000:AF00:31D7:D5E2:D08B:E51C 11:14, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 15:14, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
add another pic Syrian (talk) 11:58, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 19:25, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. User photo of a person with no valid contribs; self-promo attempt at ro:Utilizator:Dor Ilie Gikü (talk) 12:18, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 19:25, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighted image from https://allaboutbelgaum.com/news/padma-shri-awardee-pandit-s-ballesh-bhajantri-hails-from-mk-hubli/ Storchy (talk) 12:39, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 19:26, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Dublette von https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fotothek_df_hauptkatalog_0050617_Leipzig,_Hauptbahnhof.jpg, aber mit weniger Informationen Derbrauni (talk) 12:48, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, add redirection. --Wdwd (talk) 19:27, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Dublette zu https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fotothek_df_hauptkatalog_0045642_Residenzschloss_Dresden,_Chinesisches_Zimmer.jpg, aber mit weniger Informationen Derbrauni (talk) 12:49, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, add redirection. --Wdwd (talk) 19:28, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Dublette zu https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fotothek_df_hauptkatalog_0045639_Residenzschloss_Dresden,_Eckparadesaal_der_Parader%C3%A4ume.jpg, aber mit weniger Informationen Derbrauni (talk) 12:50, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, add redirection. --Wdwd (talk) 19:28, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Artwork by Corina Lecca (d. 1990). Undelete in 2061. Gikü (talk) 13:21, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 19:31, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Fails COM:FOP Sri Lanka 219.78.190.126 13:29, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 19:35, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Fails COM:FOP Uzbekistan 219.78.190.126 13:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 19:35, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Foto is gemaakt in museum Alberti, maar omdat de foto van een ander is (mogelijke copyright) kan deze foto maar beter weggehaald worden. Om misverstanden te voorkomen. WaltieD (talk) 13:44, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader requested deletion of recently created, unused content/G7. --Wdwd (talk) 19:37, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Not own work. Erick Soares3 (talk) 13:45, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 19:37, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Taken from the state website and listed under a false self work license https://lens.google.com/search?p=ASQ0Rg2t-uctcaumAZ7FxSk52I8T39WCCXS1iTqktnBW1KVSBdAll6RhywvhoM9q5s0aWK5JETNZaK16EXTSCKnJpleXw_kmI4J-7PYBF-x6NodHlsmOgQmhZ7H1aeFDH1kXNaDk5R_N2f8-oRYOk93fYw8vdAU23rZamXvEMfpipwfrTadnbMLajPPiH-ySPzZXooXck5RSsahm0SNseeBzXAgdY8AdrJjPqXE38otqHgoNgBVrnjsTbBS5ZUaio4xn9wfzUodyVdk5s-a-Jx7X_3sg26sKilZk1-kk9Up5ZzcnV_OJvtZH6Uc5OAqyp4izEaqDrfH0KkuiFOk%3D&s&ep=ccm#lns=W251bGwsbnVsbCxudWxsLG51bGwsbnVsbCxudWxsLG51bGwsIkVrY0tKR1V5T1dZeE5EZzRMVFExTURZdE5HTTROQzA1TWpKaExXTXhNalkyWXpNNVkySXpZUklmYnpsUmNtOTZZbVl3YTI5aFJVWkRjWGQ0VEhKTVVEVmhiRGRQVDBGU1p3PT0iXQ== Putitonamap98 (talk) 13:59, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 19:38, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope logo of a non-notable Youtube channel. Gikü (talk) 14:29, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 19:40, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
I am represented in this picture and I am the copyright holder and submitter to wikimedia. I want this image deleted Lenov~commonswiki (talk) 14:31, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep as uploader you were (or should have been) aware that CC licenses are irrevocable. Zenwort (talk) 22:25, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: not a recent upload, file in use. --Wdwd (talk) 19:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Lê Hải Hiệp (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical/official photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 19:42, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Per description, the image is credited to UniTBv – which is en:Transilvania University of Brașov. No proof of permission has been given; the licensing is default "own work". Gikü (talk) 14:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, missing permission. --Wdwd (talk) 19:43, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Internety resolution thus unlikely own work; non-notable person. See also File:Teofil Codrin Bradea Branzas.png. Gikü (talk) 15:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused personal photo by non-contributor. --Wdwd (talk) 19:46, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Internety resolution thus unlikely own work; non-notable person. See also File:Teofil Codrin Bradea.jpg. Gikü (talk) 15:11, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused personal photo by non-contributor. --Wdwd (talk) 19:46, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Author is "VIKTOR SHOHIN" like EXIF and watermark in the pic. 2003:DE:70A:29FC:B01D:60BF:52DA:E58B 15:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 19:46, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
I don't see any indication that this is released under the claimed CC-BY-SA 4.0 license. Larry Hockett (talk) 16:03, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Deleted per nomination. Thuresson (talk) 21:07, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
The source page on Flickr is marked "All Rights Reserved" Larry Hockett (talk) 16:24, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Deleted per nomination. Thuresson (talk) 21:05, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
COM:NOTUSED: This file seems to have been uploaded for the sole purpose of being used on GitHub, but it's not even used there anymore. TilmannR (talk) 15:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 07:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:20, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused personal photo by non-contributor, out of scope. --Wdwd (talk) 07:31, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
On ne voit quasiment rien sur la photo. Remontees (talk) 15:36, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- La photo a été prise spécifiquement pour montrer le caténaire 25kV, qui était au moment de la prise tout nouveau, à la place du caténaire 3kV qui venait d'être déposé. Comme la photo est optimisée pour le contraste dudit caténaire, le train n'est n'est très bien présenté. On trouve bien des photos de ces rames Stadler Flirt ailleurs si besoin est. Oldboltonian (talk) 21:31, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Wdwd (talk) 07:32, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope. Promo attempt at ro:Utilizator:Penthing Gikü (talk) 15:40, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 07:32, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope user pic of a user with no valid contribs – m:Special:CentralAuth/Luminita Voica. Slight oportunity to use the material for Category:Traditional clothing of Romania. Gikü (talk) 15:41, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused personal photo by non-contributor, out of scope. --Wdwd (talk) 07:33, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
No FOP in Romania. Author is ro:Vasile Rizeanu (d. 2010), so undelete in 2081. Gikü (talk) 15:43, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 07:34, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
BWV 56 by a Dublin orchestra
[edit]- File:Bach BWV 56 opening aria Nigel Williams Orchestra of St Cecilia.mp3
- File:Bach BWV 56 second recitative Nigel Williams Orchestra of St Cecilia.mp3
- File:Bach BWV 56 first recitative Nigel Williams Orchestra of St Cecilia.mp3
- File:Bach BWV 56 closing chorale Cantata SIngers Orchestra of St Cecilia Dublin.mp3
- File:Bach BWV 56 bass oboe aria Nigel Williams Orchestra of St Cecilia.mp3
Unambiguous copyright violations. The claim that this is appropriately licensed is not correct. The given source only has the recordings available ([2]); but does not specify any CC license, otherwise quite explicitly states that Warning: The music examples in the Bach Cantatas Website are for educational purposes only. Any distribution or commercial use of these music examples is absolutely forbidden. (which thus makes them inherently incompatible with Commons requirements) [3]. The ensemble responsible for the recording clearly mentions (Official website) that they have made CDs from some of these recordings (which further makes the idea that they would destroy their commercial value by making them freely available dubious); and similar recordings on their official youtube channel (ex. BWV 40) are not CC-licensed. RandomCanadian (talk) 15:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Summary
[edit]One of the summaries will suffice to check matters.
I will take the first file, just as an example:
https://www.bach-cantatas.com/MusEx/BWV56-OSC-M01.mp3
Opening aria of Bach's Cantata No. 56, "Ich will den Kreuzstab gerne tragen" sung by the bass-baritone Nigel Williams, with the Orchestra of St Cecilia, Dublin, conducted by David Milne. This was a live performance. The Orchestra disbanded when its artistic director Lindsay Armstrong retired in 2014; his musical archives, including recordings, are now publicly available at Dublin City Library.
As stated this was a live performance in 2009 which then became publicly available at Dublin City Library. When the artistic director of the group retired in 2014, he gave up all his archives, including recordings, to the Library, where they are publicly available. The live recordings have many blemishes: at the beginning of the bass-baritone aria a sudden wooden thud is heard, like a bench dropping; similarly there are loud coughs throughout the solo passages.
For the bass, oboe aria, the normal timing would be between 6 and 7 minutes. Here the recording is just over 3 minutes long; the da capo aria has been cut so that there is no middle section or recapitulation. It is clearly documented that the Orchestra of St Cecilia ceased functioning in 2014 and with that, whatever recordings occurred came into public ownership.
"The Dublin City Public Library and Archive has recently acquired the Orchestra of St Cecilia Collection, deposited by manager/artistic director Lindsay Armstrong after his retirement and the dissolution of the company at the end of 2014. The collection comprises Armstrong’s comprehensive administrative records arranged chronologically with individual folders for each orchestral performance. It documents the detailed practicalities of managing an orchestra and putting on independent concerts. The collection includes proofs, drafts and final versions of concert programmes, posters, flyers, correspondence (letters, notes, cards, postcards, faxes, emails), programme notes, recordings, soloists and conductor’ biographies and headshots, press-cuttings, invoices, receipts, contracts, legal documentation, grant applications, sponsorship documentation and general handwritten administrative notes (e.g. budgetary calculations and lists of orchestral performers with their position). Access to the collection provides unparalleled insight into the processes involved in professional orchestra and event management from the turn of the twenty-first century through recession times in Dublin."
Dublin City Public Library statement
There a links to vimeo and podcasts on that page, advertising "Bach Church Cantatas Highlights and Haydn Complete Symphonies Highlights are concert recordings featuring highlights from the Orchestra of St Cecilia". On 7 March 2010 the Orchestra of St Cecilia, Dublin completed its project of performing all two hundred of Bach’s Church Cantatas over ten years and sixty concerts! This playlist features highlights from the Orchestra of St Cecilia Complete Bach Cantatas Project 2001-2010 performed at St Ann's Church Dublin.
There are at least five CDs for these Cantata Highlights. For CD 1, the first MP3 file is
https://www.bach-cantatas.com/MusEx/BWV150-OSC-M01.mp3
which is identical to the "Dublin City Libraries & Archives" stream
I have not yet matched up other recordings, but all of them are registered to Dublin City Public Library, so are public. I have previously contacted Aryeh Oron, the main coordinator of bach-cantatas.com, some time ago, so perhaps he can clarify matters. This is not something that be decided very quickly. Mathsci (talk) 20:15, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Just a single factual correction: As stated this was a live performance in 2009 which then became publicly available at Dublin City Library. When the artistic director of the group retired in 2014, he gave up all his archives, including recordings, to the Library, where they are publicly available. "Publicly available" does not, in any way, shape or form, equate with "out of copyright" (especially not for a group production, where each artist involved would have had to have signed licensing rights or copyright waivers...), not does it equate with the CC-BY 4.0 license specified in the files. This book is also publicly available at plenty of libraries (as are millions of others): it is plainly still in copyright. RandomCanadian (talk) 22:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- The website here clearly states that the archives of the oboist and artistic director Lindsay Armstrong were donated to Dublin City Library and freely available. It's unclear why a book is being mentioned, when it can have nothing to do with commons. I'm not sure how the library manages their affairs, but I could hear the streaming and could google register; nowhere in the blurbs above was there any indication of copyright. The streaming had English adverts, not Irish. As mentioned before, there are certainly experts who can help, specifically the Israeli webmaster Aryeh Oron; I can likewise telephone or email one of the Dublin librarians. There are also wikipedia experts/admins in Ireland who can help. Mathsci (talk) 00:59, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- What you are doing is a prime example of an w:Invincible ignorance fallacy. "Publicly available" does not mean "out of copyright". The default is "in copyright" unless rights are explicitly waived. The soundcloud does not include any licensing information. The works remain into copyright unless there is proof of the contrary. The book is an example of something that is "publicly available" yet is plainly still in copyright. This is also publicly and freely available: it's plainly still in copyright. This should probably be speedied per COMMONS:F1. RandomCanadian (talk) 01:03, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- Here, also, another example of something that is "publicly available" (via soundcloud, just like the other Dublin examples), and yet, is clearly, as stated at the bottom of the relevant page ([4]), still in copyright. RandomCanadian (talk) 01:08, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- The website here clearly states that the archives of the oboist and artistic director Lindsay Armstrong were donated to Dublin City Library and freely available. It's unclear why a book is being mentioned, when it can have nothing to do with commons. I'm not sure how the library manages their affairs, but I could hear the streaming and could google register; nowhere in the blurbs above was there any indication of copyright. The streaming had English adverts, not Irish. As mentioned before, there are certainly experts who can help, specifically the Israeli webmaster Aryeh Oron; I can likewise telephone or email one of the Dublin librarians. There are also wikipedia experts/admins in Ireland who can help. Mathsci (talk) 00:59, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- WHY ARE YOU MAKING COMMENTS ABOUT THE NATIONAL ANTHEM WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS CANTATA? PLEASE STOP THIS. THANKS. Mathsci (talk) 04:45, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- You were arguing that simply because the files are "publicly available", they are fine to be hosted on Commons. I hope my contributions show that is simply not the case. There needs to be an explicit indication the files are properly licensed, which is lacking (or, if you follow the BCW website, is rather explicit that the files are only appropriate for personal, non-commercial use). There are lots of things which are freely available which are not fine for Commons (or even as fair use on Wikipedia). RandomCanadian (talk) 04:54, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- PLEASE DON'T ADD IRRELEVANT CONTENT ABOUT "GOD SAVE THE QUEEN" HERE. EXPERIMENT IN A SANDBOX. Mathsci (talk) 05:13, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- You can't just shout in all caps and in bold that "it's irrelevant" and then ignore the explanations for why it, in fact, is relevant. That is exactly what the w:Invincible ignorance fallacy is, and why I linked it. RandomCanadian (talk) 05:49, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- Mathsci, Commons is quite strict when it comes to documenting free licenses. Unfortunately, that means we need a clear statement that these files can be used or modified by anyone for any purpose (either using those words or through a license like CC BY that implies as much). Available, accessible, etc. to the public isn't enough. Even if the intent was to place them in the public domain, without sufficient documentation we can't host them. Our priority is protecting the people who use this content. If I decide to make an album of these recordings and sell it, because it was never released with a free license, the copyright owners could take action against me. The reason we primarily use Creative Commons licenses is because there's a lot of legal work that goes into those licenses which protects people who use the content -- people who would not be sufficiently protected by more informal language about allowing use/permission/access. Ultimately, if a file doesn't have the necessary documentation, we have to delete it even if it's probably safe to use. :/ — Rhododendrites talk | 21:34, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Rhododendrites: thanks for the response. I'm not particularly attached to the audio files; I have contacted bach-cantatas.com about the mp3 files which, if they turn out to be OK, will be a bonus. If not, then so be it.
- There are always other possibilities. The YouTube video for Herreweghe is properly licensed for ELs, etc. Finding an expressive bass-baritone soloist always presents difficulties. OTOH, for cantatas, Musopen and www.baroquemusic.org give CC audios, e.g. https://musopen.org/music/3431-unser-mund-sei-voll-lachens-bwv-110/ Similarly for en:Und es waren Hirten in derselben Gegend, BWV 248 II Mathsci (talk) 23:47, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: Missing explicit statement (=permission via COM:VRTS) for the free license. --Wdwd (talk) 07:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Dubious license. The file with the frame may be the uploader's own work, but the photograph likely is not. Bujo (talk) 16:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: derivative work without permission. --Wdwd (talk) 07:54, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
cerivative work from this file (cropped/mirror) retrived here: https://www.ilriformista.it/alessandro-orsini-licenziato-la-rai-manda-via-lopinionista-perche-ha-opinioni-sbagliate-289038/ Bradipo Lento (talk) 16:22, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Buonasera, visionata la sua contestazione le rispondo che l'immagine File:Alessandro Orsini.png è una mia opera tratta dalla immagine https://www.ilriformista.it/alessandro-orsini-licenziato-la-rai-manda-via-lopinionista-perche-ha-opinioni-sbagliate-289038 che ho ritagliato, modificata la luce e capovolta. Teoricamente non dovrebbe violare alcun copyright, se così fosse chiedo scusa e mi affretto a sostituirla.
- Cordialmente CLAUDIO-RESTANI (talk) 16:29, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- @CLAUDIO-RESTANI: :L'immagine proviene da un sito dove campeggia la scritta © Riproduzione riservata quindi ogni rielaborazione del materiale contenuto è una violazione di copyright; gli amministratori di Commons comunque decideranno cosa fare. --Bradipo Lento (talk) 18:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Non dovrebbe violare nessun copyviol..allora io prendo qualsiasi immagine da internet, la rivolto allo specchio e modifico l'immagine, ed è tutto a posto! It's a mirror, by ilriformista but from here too.--Kirk39 (talk) 23:28, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 07:55, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Covers of a book and an album by non-notable author respectively; no educational value and not necessarily own work as often is the case with cover artworks.
𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:27, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 07:56, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
A flag of non-existent political movement. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 16:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of scope. --Wdwd (talk) 08:06, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Aalexandraahh66 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Pictures of various style and various Internety resolutions – highly unlikely own work.
- File:Cruduta pentru revista playboy. png.jpg
- File:560541450340791674058989683000n.jpg
- File:Vali-vijelie-be6e8c19-1b47-4391-94a6-1063c8fbea3-resize-750.jpg
- File:12-m-cristiborcea-mfax.jpg
- File:Dan negru.png
- File:873627l-1360x0-w-43e2454e.jpg
- File:Raluca-Badulescu Kanal-D.jpg
Gikü (talk) 16:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 08:06, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Nwfalbasel (talk · contribs)
[edit]Artwork by living artist Samar Draie (self-promo attempt at ro:Wikipedia:Samar Draie). File:Samar Draie.jpg also includes such artwork in a ratio that exceeds de minimis. All materials seem out of COM:SCOPE as the artist is potentially non-notable.
- File:Samar's Carbon Drawing.jpg
- File:Samar's Carbon.jpg
- File:Carbon.SD.jpg
- File:Samar Draie.jpg
- File:The sun's daughter.jpg
- File:Lighning 1200x1200.jpg
Gikü (talk) 16:57, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 08:09, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Source makes no mention of a free use license 47.223.90.202 17:00, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 08:09, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
logo of YouTube channel claimed as uploader's own work Frupa (talk) 17:18, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 08:52, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Likely not own works: mostly low-res web-sized images with disparate quality and styles, missing or all different camera data, including obvious photo of existing photo (File:Dr Rattan Chand USBC.jpg). Many photos of same persons, unlikely that uploader was present at all these diverse places and times.
- File:RattanChandVijaywada.jpg
- File:Dr Rattan Chand USBC.jpg
- File:RattanChandIIPS.jpg
- File:Dr Rattan Chand.png
- File:Mmmittal.jpg
- File:Dadhi2.jpg
- File:Dadhi1.jpg
- File:Mr. Suresh Sharma, President of All India Law Students' Association being honored at International Council of Jurists 2010.JPG
- File:Kewal Krishan Verma.jpg
P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP. --Wdwd (talk) 08:56, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Copyright violation: the exact photo is also on https://english.ahram.org.eg/UI/Front/MultimediaInner.aspx?NewsContentID=282737&newsportalname=Multimedia (All rights reserved) JopkeB (talk) 18:21, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:01, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Spurious Creative Commons license? Larry Hockett (talk) 18:25, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- don't see permission as well as educational use --> delete --Isderion (talk) 18:28, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused personal photo by non-contributor. --Wdwd (talk) 09:02, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
may be in public domain, but this picture is not "own work" and not taken in 2021. Xocolatl (talk) 18:41, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Change license and Keep. If not PD definitely FoP-Germany --Zenwort (talk) 22:07, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: derivative work without permission, missing data (unknown date/author). --Wdwd (talk) 09:07, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Alain Girelli is born in 1948. No freedom of panorama in France. No OTRS. 2A01:CB00:A05:D100:CD36:8569:C6F6:711E 18:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: DR withdrawn. --Wdwd (talk) 09:36, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
low quality - there's a better version online. Xocolatl (talk) 18:46, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Wdwd (talk) 09:36, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Gikü as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Per EXIF, the image comes from Facebook; better proof of permission is needed. NearEMPTiness (talk) 20:07, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Gikü: Please elaborate on your deletion request, e.g. by providing the Facebook link, so that we can check the uploading dates on Facebook and Wikimedia Commons. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 20:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=411021843677655&set=pb.100043095292636.-2207520000..&type=3 – published December 27, 2020. Predates the Commons file by half a year. Gikü (talk) 20:28, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- The long time span between the uploads supports your suspicion. If the Wikimedia Commons file had been uploaded a few ours or days after the Facebook file, this would be another case. Thus, I now endorse deleting this file as a matter of caution. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 20:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- definitely Zenwort (talk) 21:59, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- The long time span between the uploads supports your suspicion. If the Wikimedia Commons file had been uploaded a few ours or days after the Facebook file, this would be another case. Thus, I now endorse deleting this file as a matter of caution. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 20:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=411021843677655&set=pb.100043095292636.-2207520000..&type=3 – published December 27, 2020. Predates the Commons file by half a year. Gikü (talk) 20:28, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:42, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Permission by the original author is missing. XenonX3 (talk) 21:55, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Derivative work, missing permission. --Wdwd (talk) 09:43, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio. Dronebogus (talk) 23:11, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:45, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Unused since 2011, this album cover, while correctly licensed, doesn't seem to be educational and more like a promotional or self-promotional upload. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:30, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Kept: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:55, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Kept without explanation, out of scope. Dronebogus (talk) 23:30, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: File has a VRTS tag -> if you have concers about the permission ask on Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard. --Wdwd (talk) 09:49, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Billiewinters (talk · contribs)
[edit]No evidence of notability or licensing
Dronebogus (talk) 23:33, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 09:50, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Commons is not a repository for crap made up one day. Dronebogus (talk) 23:34, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 09:51, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Licensing? Dronebogus (talk) 23:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 09:51, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope Dronebogus (talk) 23:36, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused personal photo by non-contributor. --Wdwd (talk) 09:52, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Scope? Licensing? Dronebogus (talk) 23:37, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 09:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope Dronebogus (talk) 23:42, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Avner Strauss seems to be a notable Israeli musician, making this within scope. IronGargoyle (talk) 00:23, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. --Wdwd (talk) 09:54, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
in scope? Dronebogus (talk) 23:45, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. In use, but a copyrighted album cover with no evidence of permission. IronGargoyle (talk) 00:11, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 09:55, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio. Dronebogus (talk) 23:46, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 10:32, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Basquyati as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Image of low relevance
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion. -- Túrelio (talk) 06:59, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Looks fine to me. --RAN (talk) 12:22, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- I found that the LSO-3 compound is just research material. It never had any relevance, I think it was discarded. Basquyati (talk) 18:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- OK, you can delete it, no objection from me. --RAN (talk) 14:39, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Mistaken upload: the uploader acknowledges that the file has no relevance here. Marbletan (talk) 20:42, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per uploader's request. — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 09:23, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:20, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
mature content 197.221.255.141 20:16, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think that was a porno by any means that is only an ejaculation demonstration 131.255.4.90 03:29, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: See below. --IronGargoyle (talk) 13:51, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
I am the owner and I wish this to be removed permanently Xmrmonkeyx (talk) 04:53, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 05:06, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
I don't believe this is "own work". Higher resolution can be found here. No meaningful description, no metadata. It is the only contribution of the user. Wouter (talk) 09:04, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --✗plicit 02:27, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE powerpoint slide. Gikü (talk) 16:38, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:14, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
"own work"??? nope. wrong date... Xocolatl (talk) 18:31, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:14, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Alain Girelli is born in 1948. No freedom of panorama in France. No OTRS. 2A01:CB00:A05:D100:CD36:8569:C6F6:711E 19:53, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Merci de présenter les raisons pourquoi la photo coucher de soleil est sur la sellette 2A01:CB14:2D7:3B00:7991:52DC:B668:F018 07:22, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- Il n'y a pas de liberté de panorama dans le droit français. Cela signifie que les sculptures (mais aussi les œuvres architecturales originales) y sont protégées par le droit d'auteur. Une photo est donc une contrefaçon en droit français, et ce jusqu'à 70 ans après la mort du sculpteur. Litlok (talk) 06:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Merci de présenter les raisons pourquoi la photo coucher de soleil est sur la sellette 2A01:CB14:2D7:3B00:7991:52DC:B668:F018 07:22, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Litlok (talk) 06:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:16, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope + WTF Dronebogus (talk) 23:40, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:15, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
Licensing? Scope? Dronebogus (talk) 23:40, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:14, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Even though this image was taken in Ethiopia, it was published by a non-Ethiopian entity and apparently taken by non-Ethiopians, so it is still subject to copyright. C.Fred (talk) 21:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:43, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
nothing provided by the uploader to show they own the image Lugnuts (talk) 11:44, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. --Wdwd (talk) 07:10, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Sculptor Ion Duman is either living or has only died recently, and there is no FOP in Romania. Based on [5] sculptor Eugen Ilina (b. 1965) was Duman's classmate, so that puts the latter's age in the late 50s. Gikü (talk) 22:22, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. No commercial freedom of panorama indeed in Romania, and whether or not Duman is alive, the work is copyrighted as still within less than 70 years of posthumous copyright as per COM:ROMANIA. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:06, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gestumblindi (talk) 23:17, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy as no permission (No permission since). See below. Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC) .
- Delete for now, 2012 + 70 + 1 = 2083. Per "{{PD-Vietnam}}", anyone reading this in the year of our Lord 2083 please check this template to see if the copyrights have been extended, if so then please adjust the year of undeletion accordingly. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 13:41, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Even if this passes license review, no evidence it’s in scope Dronebogus (talk) 23:43, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted by Krd at 03:37, 29 August 2022 UTC: No ticket permission achieved for more than 30 days --Krdbot 06:17, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Wolfdog406 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Non-notable proposed flags created by inactive user
- File:Square Flag of Billings, Montana (proposed).png
- File:SquareVersionOfProposedBillingsMTFlag.png
- File:Flag of Yellowstone County (Proposed).png
- File:Flag of Montana (proposed).png
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Dronebogus (talk) 13:09, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:23, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Wolfdog406 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Symbols of non-notable organization
Dronebogus (talk) 13:10, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, unused, out of scope. --Wdwd (talk) 19:30, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Imaginary AFVs
[edit]Out of project's scope
- File:Landkreuzer Maus II Ausf. B.png
- File:M113A1gryffozar47.jpg
- File:MBT - Otamat . ОБТ - Отаман.jpg
- File:Tun antitanc autopropulsat model 1985 (artist impression).jpg
- File:ZTA-2 ACV.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Le Petit Chat (talk) 13:24, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:24, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Files uploaded by InvalidUserWarriorX (talk · contribs)
[edit]No sources for images that are part of the montage. Per COM:Collages, the individual images must be sourced so to verify if these come from freely-licensed files here or just grabbed from the Internet (if the latter is true, then potential copyright violation).
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:23, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:25, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
parce que c'est floue Mopepe243 (talk) 14:34, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- “because it's blurry”? There are loads of worse pictures on Commons. Rather more troubling would be FoP-Congo --Zenwort (talk) 22:23, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete@Zenwort: Have a good Commons trip, but neither Congo, Republic of nor Congo, D.R have FOP. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:51, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - certainly not blurry, but it is a DW. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:26, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Recent building. No FOP in Romania. Gikü (talk) 22:01, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:28, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Recent building. No FOP in Romania. Gikü (talk) 22:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:28, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Copyvio. Dronebogus (talk) 23:06, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Comment. I think this is worth keeping based on scope. It is part of a notable cartoon franchise and is also in use on Simple English Wikipedia. This does raise some copyright concerns, but I see there is a VRT ticket with another image from the franchise (File:Bravest Warriors Promo Poster.png). That ticket may allow for this image to be kept. If it does not, it could be worth following up with the rightsholder. IronGargoyle (talk) 00:32, 19 April 2022 (UTC)- Keep. I’m Pretty sure IronGargoyle was slightly does have a point but the Character really needs some Profile Image, so i’m voting Strong Keep.RobertLeyva2003 8 June 2022
- No, copyright violations cannot under any circumstances be kept. Since the copyright is not proven the image must either receive proof in a timely manner or be deleted. Dronebogus (talk) 01:23, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- comment I’ve cropped the poster to create thumb|, a confirmed free alternative. Dronebogus (talk) 07:55, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Nice. That is a great solution in case the language submitted to VRT is not broad enough to keep the image under discussion. IronGargoyle (talk) 13:36, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Speedy delete Copyvio. No proof of CC-4.0. "Author: Wiki" is nonsens. --Jahobr (talk) 15:39, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:29, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
original dated 13.11.2014 here: https://fckrasnodar.ru/academy/photo/object/?object_id=94607 Fedor Babkin (talk) 08:57, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --shizhao (talk) 09:44, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Solomon203 as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G1|The location is not Taipei 101 Observatory. File uploader is Hangz Leundra Rumma and redirect creator is Jarould, so the redirect does not qualify for speedy deletion and I allow discussion. Taivo (talk) 11:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --shizhao (talk) 09:44, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
copy vio from this https://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/5f69d27a9a794747aa52f7a8 site (TASS) Kotofey2016 (talk) 11:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Hi, link from this resource https://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/5f69d27a9a794747aa52f7a8 is a photo with the governor of another russian region. My photo was made by the official photographer of the government of the Penza region, it has not been used anywhere before. Adding this photo does not violate the community rules.
- Please cancel your action. Soler from Astora (talk) 07:42, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- This photo was not taken by me, but the person who took it gave it to me, the copyright belongs to me. I want it to be freely available, this is my right, it does not violate the rules of the community. Soler from Astora (talk) 07:54, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --shizhao (talk) 09:45, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo of a non-notable company Gikü (talk) 14:54, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Rosenzweig τ 11:10, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
This is certainly not Creative Commons licensed. This image is fully copyrighted by Private Division. 113.160.44.130 03:03, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellywa (talk) 03:12, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy as no permission (No permission since). Isn't this a "{{PD-textlogo}}"? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:12, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Obviously keep, as it doesn't seem like this logo passes the threshold of originality and as far as I can tell fonts aren't copyrightable in Vietnam. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 05:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: per remark of Donald Trung. --Ellywa (talk) 03:15, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
This is a horrible image of me, and I do not want this picture on the internet. Roskerj (talk) 06:17, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion (sorry). I think you look nice. Suggestion to nominate again with objection to personality rights? This is depending on country of origin. I did not look into that for now. --Ellywa (talk) 03:23, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
apparently this is the logo for "Asia Extreme Wrestling". I can't find anything on this except for this webpage of a joke profile for a wrestler that does not exist - http://www.geocities.ws/cwf/superstars/alexandermagnus2.html. Probably not notable, isn't even used on any pages Nutshinou Talk! 09:30, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, out of COM:SCOPE. Not in use on the projects. --Ellywa (talk) 03:26, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
1916 y photo, unknown original author, unknown copyright status Drakosh (talk) 11:21, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Это мой родственник. Фото из личного семейного архива 94.45.186.136 11:37, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- needs correct licensing and author info (also next one) Zenwort (talk) 22:34, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. No evidence that image was published anonymously more then 70 years ago per COM:RUSSIA. Can be safely undeleted in 1916+121=2027 . --Ellywa (talk) 03:29, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
File:Лукьянов Г.Л. (крайний слева) в окружении отца, сестёр и брата на могиле матери в городе Моздок. 28 января 1915 года.jpg
[edit]_%D0%B2_%D0%BE%D0%BA%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B8_%D0%BE%D1%82%D1%86%D0%B0,_%D1%81%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D1%91%D1%80_%D0%B8_%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0_%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B5_%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8_%D0%B2_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B5_%D0%9C%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%BA._28_%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%8F_1915_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B0.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_%D0%B2_%D0%BE%D0%BA%D1%80%D1%83%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B8_%D0%BE%D1%82%D1%86%D0%B0,_%D1%81%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D1%91%D1%80_%D0%B8_%D0%B1%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0_%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%B5_%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8_%D0%B2_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B5_%D0%9C%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%BA._28_%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%8F_1915_%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B0.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
1916 y photo, unknown original author, unknown copyright status Drakosh (talk) 11:21, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Это мой родственник. Фото из семейного архива 94.45.186.136 12:03, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. No evidence that image was published anonymously more then 70 years ago per COM:RUSSIA. Can be safely undeleted in 1916+121=2027 . --Ellywa (talk) 03:29, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Not in use, low quality. Andel (talk) 16:30, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete Артём 13327 (talk) 14:33, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and COM:SS. --Ellywa (talk) 03:30, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Не с Kremlin.ru MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 16:41, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: source cannot be reached. So not sure this image is from Russian government. Deleted per COM:PRP. --Ellywa (talk) 03:35, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
NO FOP in France - Category:French FOP cases/pending JopkeB (talk) 15:15, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
- Keep I am sorry, I now see that the artist himself was the uploader, so I withdraw this deletion request. JopkeB (talk) 15:18, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello JopkeB,
indeed, I own the copyright because I am the creator artist.
Thanks for correcting. --Alain Girelli (talk) 09:42, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:23, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Habertix as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Œuvre de fr:Alain Girelli et absence de liberté de panorama en France: une autorisation de l'artiste par OTRS/VRT est nécessaire. Converting to DR per COM:CSD#F3. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:29, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. — Racconish 💬 12:40, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
Alain Girelli is born in 1948. No freedom of panorama in France. No OTRS. 2A01:CB00:A05:D100:CD36:8569:C6F6:711E 18:41, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - no COM:FOP France, needs COM:VRT from the sculptor. -M.nelson (talk) 21:39, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
- Dear Alain Girelli, Please send an email to VRT Team that you are indeed Alain girelli, the sculptor of this work. Otherwise your photos of your arwork will be nominated for deletion again and again. --JopkeB (talk) 02:56, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellywa (talk) 03:37, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Also
- File:6ix9ine_-(cropped).jpg
- File:Vladimir_Cauchemar_-_Aulos_Reloaded_clip.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by Decol50 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
This video can't be a CC license, because rights of music video is owned by Ed Bangers Records or copyright holders. Music video director was just hired by label or musician to produced the video and no rights to release a video under the CC license. Should be deleted. Decol50 (talk) 18:57, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Today the source, https://vimeo.com/292621200, does not show the CCBYSA licence so probably it has been revised because it was not justified. Therefore these images must be deleted as well. --Ellywa (talk) 03:41, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Misleading file. This was only the flag of the Empire of China, never of Beijing. VulpesVulpes42 (talk) 19:03, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Change description and Keep Zenwort (talk) 22:05, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete File:Flag of the Empire of China (1915–1916).svg already exists. and the color scheme is different from the real one.--起司狗 (talk) 13:54, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete not used to represent the city of Beijing in any way. Nacaru (talk) 22:21, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- The outcome of this DR should also apply to File:Flag_of_Beijing.svg, btw, as it's a derivative in svg format. Nacaru (talk) 22:25, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination and Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by User:SagoShader. Not in use on the projects today. --Ellywa (talk) 03:44, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
If this is a photo by Rita Martin, as suggested by the given author and category, it's still in copyright in its source country, the United Kingdom, for 70 years after the photographer's death, that is, until 2028. Can be undeleted in 2029. The source is a UK (London) publication, so the currently used {{PD-1923}} US license template isn't sufficient on Commons. Gestumblindi (talk) 19:34, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. But since English Wikisource only requires works to be PD in the US (not source country), please hold off on deletion until we have a chance to import the files locally. Note that this also affects File:Every Woman's Encyclopedia Volume 1.djvu and all the files in Category:Every Woman's Encyclopaedia, Volume 1 (book) for which an individual assessment has not been made (per COM:PRP). --Xover (talk) 12:22, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. I suppose sufficient time has passed to import to Wikisource. --Ellywa (talk) 04:04, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo, 'own work' claim is contradicted by the source declaration. Gikü (talk) 21:47, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellywa (talk) 04:05, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
USPTO decision states that the statuette is copyrightable, but that this new logo does not constitute an original work because only simple shapes are added onto the existing work. The main part of the logo (the statuette) is still under copyright. Yeeno (talk) 19:14, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- “new logo does not constitute an original work” thus if the shape of the statuette is part of that logo this constitutes no separate claim (the statuette as 3dimensional figure is referred to in the second part above) --Zenwort (talk) 22:04, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
Keep Since there hasn't been, at least from what I can find, any changes in reasoning from the US Copyright Office or to this file, I think it's clear that their decision to refuse copyright specifically to the triangle with the statuette silhouette stands. Holding copyright on a 3D physical statuette is very different to holding the copyright to its outline: you can engrave cube with immensely intricate and original designs, but you won't be able to copyright its silhouette that's a square.
It is true, of course, that a combination of unprotectable elements may qualify for copyright protection. But it is not true that any combination of unprotectable elements automatically qualifies for copyright protection. Our case law suggests, and we hold today, that a combination of unprotectable elements is eligible for copyright protection only if those elements are numerous enough and their selection and arrangement original enough that their combination constitutes an original work of authorship.
Essentially, other key reasons are that the shape is a derivative (based on) the statuette and to be copyrightable separately, "derivative work must be independently created." However, as simply being based on another object isn't everything to reject it, the Copyright Office also considered the shape (which is what is used in this logo/image) and described it thusly...
...The new expression contained in the Work consists of “merely trivial” combinations of standard shapes and colors and therefore does not possess the “modicum [minimum] of creativity”
TL;DR: A three-dimensional statuette figure with defined features is enough to be copyrighted. This is a separate, although related, two-dimensional (flat) logo and when you look at its outline, it's just a few curves, lines and ovals, which aren't enough. — Bacon Noodles (talk • contribs • uploads) 12:53, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
Original ruling/source/authority:
https://www.copyright.gov/rulings-filings/review-board/docs/academy-logo.pdf
- Comment - If I am not mistaken, since the only (presumed) copyrightable element would be the image of the statue, presuming this is indeed a copyright violation, would this work enter the public domain in 2025 as a derivative work due to the statue's copyright expiring that year (95 + 1 years after 1929)? (Oinkers42) (talk) 23:27, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
-2022-04-24T23:27:00.000Z-File:Academy_of_Motion_Picture_Arts_and_Sciences_logo.svg){kind=link}
- Delete as COM:DW of the statuette and undelete in
20252037 when the copyright on the statuette expires per Oinkers42. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete since it copies the expression of the statuette. The key phrase there is "new expression"; the only copyrightable expression present is the outline of the statuette, but that expression was registered in 1941 (the statuette was technically unpublished until then, so the 95 year clock started at that point). No additional copyrightable expression was added -- only the triangle and trapezoidal base, which is not enough to support a copyright, thus the logo could not be registered as a derivative work. However, it still contains some of the 1941 expression. Undelete in 2037. Carl Lindberg (talk) 05:46, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- For a particular quote from the ruling linked above:
- The Board agrees with AMPAS that the Oscar statuette is a preexisting work protected by copyright. [...] In the Work, the new expression consists solely of a black isosceles triangle that surrounds the preexisting white Oscar silhouette and a white trapezoid that is placed below. The "preexisting white Oscar silhouette" was existing, registered copyrightable expression, so could not count towards the threshold of originality of a newly-registered work. However, that part is still copyrighted, and is present in the logo, so the logo is still controlled by that copyright. Carl Lindberg (talk) 05:46, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- For a particular quote from the ruling linked above:
Deleted: per nomination, discussion. The file can be restored in 2037. --Rosenzweig τ 08:46, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
