Commons:Deletion requests/2024/07/16

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

July 16

[edit]

after coming home I figured out that I had misidentified the location of the cave (Lúsíuhellir). It is further to the right and not visable in the image. So this image doesn't show anything of importance and I would like it to be deleted Steinninn ♨ 01:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The griffin(?) is too complex to be able to be licensed with {{PD-textlogo}}. This logo can only be kept if it would be freely licensed or if it's PD for some other reason, perhaps too old so the copyright has expired, but that I do not know. Jonteemil (talk) 02:03, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion is ok by me. I was not sure about the threshold for the complexity or originality regarding graphical work that is accepted here or not. If it's agreed upon here that the griffin is too complex, alright then. I will contact MAK, the museum, as we (Wikimedia Austria) are planning projects together in autumn, and maybe I will make another upload then including their release information. --Manfred Werner (WMAT) (talk) 09:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:TOO Iceland does not exist. This logo might hence be above unless evidence of the contrary is presented. Jonteemil (talk) 02:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence of permission is needed if deemed above COM:TOO Iceland which does not exist. This logo might hence be above unless evidence of the contrary is presented. Jonteemil (talk) 02:09, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence of permission is needed if deemed above COM:TOO Iceland which does not exist. This logo might hence be above it unless evidence of the contrary is presented.

Jonteemil (talk) 02:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Needs proof of license, otherwise copyvio. Jonteemil (talk) 02:40, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Above COM:TOO Australia which is very low.

Jonteemil (talk) 02:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Complexity-wise it's clearly above COM:TOO Australia however I don't know how unique it has to be, so hence {{PD-ineligible}} would be possible but I'm no lawyer. Jonteemil (talk) 02:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The file is an image of the Bronx Whitestone Bridge, which was taken from a press release (archived) of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA). There was another notice on the MTA website (archived) that states "Click on any of the pictures in the newsroom stories [...] for you to use in your own publication".

Judging from their wordings, it appears that the MTA only allowed personal use. Whether they permitted reproduction and commercial usage is doubtful. The file therefore has unclear copyright status, and might be eligible for deletion under COM:PCP. 廣九直通車 (talk) 03:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP for 2D works in US A1Cafel (talk) 03:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


 Delete, apparently the author is w:en:Jimmy O'Neal (see this). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No freedom of panorama in Senegal A1Cafel (talk) 04:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


:What? The actual location is Cape Verde (French: Cap-Vert) not Senegal. no freedom of panorama either. TentingZones1 (talk) 04:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: Cap-Vert was in Senegal, not the country. TentingZones1 (talk) 04:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 04:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No idea what FoP for 2D works means, but I aver this JPG is from my smartphone of a streetview in the city of Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA, as described in the upload. Other publicly visible architecture, civic art, and similar visual material is freely published not for commercial use. So this image conforms to that standard. Gpwitteveen (talk) 20:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Similar to UK, no freedom of panorama for "graphic works" in Canada A1Cafel (talk) 04:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


This is a ridiculous challenge.
I took the photo in the city park in Kelowna BC Canada and am certain it was a public piece of art at the time.
Do not remove this photo. 174.4.76.175 20:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
what more do i need to do to defend this work? Accuruss (talk) 20:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

uploaded by mistake Si Gam (talk) 04:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Asheville NC murals by User:Clusternote (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Same case as Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with Interstate 240 Overpass, Asheville, NC.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JWilz12345: What mean that title "Files uploaded by Clusternote" ? I don't recall being targeted in any way, and I don't understand why there hasn't been any discussion about removing the entire related category, i.e. Category:Murals in Asheville, North Carolina and Category:Murals in the United States. --Clusternote (talk) 09:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Clusternote automatically generated by COM:VisualFileChange tool when nominating uploads sorted by uploader (the uploader includes Flickr file importers like you), since importing is an act of uploading.
re: other murals. The other images must be reviewed on a case-to-case basis. Murals that were unveiled or made from 1989 onwards are certainly copyrighted and should be nominated, but some evidence like year of the mural and author/s (that is, the muralist/s) is needed to validate deletion requests. The complexity of the U.S. laws on copyright means that works that were made before 1978 are in public domain (even if the artist/s is/are still alive today) because during thosw days, registration/renewal is required (see also {{PD-US-no notice}} and {{PD-US-not renewed}}). Works made between 1978 and 1989 are subject to further complications, but can be hosted here provided that the conditions indicated at {{PD-US-1978-89}} are met. For 1978–89, mere public display no longer negates copyright. Copyright is only nullified if one or more tangible copies of the same work were published with approval from the artist/s. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, very thanks! --Clusternote (talk) 09:39, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

image téléchargée du web Integrated-Circuit (talk) 05:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

De facto duplicate od File:II Brygada Legionów podczas walk w Karpatach (22-126-2).jpg. Aʀvєδuι + 05:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Не собственная работа: персонаж умер в 1942 -- Tomasina (talk) 05:58, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Фото 1928 года не может быть собственной работой -- Tomasina (talk) 05:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 06:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by nonnotable youtuber; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 06:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

flag of fictional country, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 06:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Piret Herja (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unused PDFs. Out of project scope.

Estopedist1 (talk) 06:23, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed as PD but no evidence that this work was created by a government unit . This was posted on the Twitter page of someone in the photo

Gbawden (talk) 06:23, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Official assemblymember account. Government employee BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 06:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Evropea (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Old photo(s). Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.

Estopedist1 (talk) 06:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep File:Ignacy Jan Paderewski podczas spotkania z Polakami w Poznaniu.jpg is found in Narodowe Archiwum Cyfrowe clearly marked as public domain. It was taken in 1918. I'll update the file's information and license.
 Comment File:Tłumy Polaków witających Paderewskiego na ulicach Poznania.jpg is from the same event in 1918 in Poland/Germany, but I can't locate the exact source. This site lists two other sources for the photos (including this one) that are on the page, so likely one of those but not online.
Tcr25 (talk) 13:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no permission from given author (organisation) see details which read "source vhm.be" Hoyanova (talk) 06:31, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no permission, protected logo see summary which reads "source vhm.be" Hoyanova (talk) 06:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

there is permission since i am volunteer in the organisation that owns this logo... Garfieldje (talk) 11:59, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no permission from given author Jordy Knoops Hoyanova (talk) 06:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is permission i know this person because we are working at the same place Garfieldje (talk) 19:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no permission from given author DVA Hoyanova (talk) 06:34, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No permission from given author Debby Plain Hoyanova (talk) 06:35, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no permission protected logo from a tv company Hoyanova (talk) 06:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company Hoyanova (talk) 06:45, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company Hoyanova (talk) 06:45, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company Hoyanova (talk) 06:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company Hoyanova (talk) 06:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company Hoyanova (talk) 06:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company Hoyanova (talk) 06:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:53, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently no picture at https://members.parliament.uk/member/5361/portrait and it seems unlikely this is "own work". But if it is, the uploader can use COM:VRT. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:56, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now there is a another version at File:Official portrait of James McMurdock MP crop 2.jpg Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Odd. The JPG is certainly sourced from the Parliament website: see this link. However, the official portrait does not show up on the MP's profile yet as you say. The Commons are in the process of uploading these portraits at the moment, so perhaps it would be better to wait for a few days before determining whether to delete it. The official portraits are all made freely available once uploaded to their respective MPs' profiles: see this ThatRandomGuy1 (talk) 10:01, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:56, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:58, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:58, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work as claimed but a protected logo from a tv company no author given no permission Hoyanova (talk) 06:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Teme007 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

artworks by Minna Linja (born 1978). Permission is needed.

Two images of old houses: unused files, someone's photographical art? Out of project scope.

Estopedist1 (talk) 07:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Old photo(s). Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unrecognisably blurry pixelised photo. May have been better than nothing in 2021 but Commons has other photos of this person now. Belbury (talk) 07:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Unusable for any purpose. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These two German Notgeld (emergency money) bills from the 1920s are works of August Schluttenhofer, who died in 1971. So they are not in the public domain in Germany yet, and the files should be deleted. They can be restored in 2042.

Rosenzweig τ 07:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Contains personal/private information DavidMelby (talk) 08:48, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep. I do not see any personal/private information. If you mean filename, then the file can be renamed. Please say a better filename and I can rename it, hiding old filename. Taivo (talk) 08:38, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 21:06, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Violate copyright 185.70.53.139 04:20, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

I DON'T WANT IT HERE ANYMORE!!! GET IT! I WILL KEEP NOMINATING UNTILL DELETED DavidMelby (talk) 07:34, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. (Note: Good quality useful image, uploaded by photographer under irrevocable free license. @DavidMelby: No evident reason for deletion beyond you changed your mind years later for unexplained reasons. Repeat renomination without specific reasons for Commons:Deletion policy will do nothing other than annoy other users at best, and if repeated abusively could be considered vandalism.) --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:04, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image contains a watermark that contains personal information (my name) furthermore the Exif contains my personal information (email and phone number) I'm using my European GDPR rights to have this image deleted from your database since my personal being can be identified from both watermark and Exif. DavidMelby (talk) 07:43, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also the filename itself contains my name and I can therefor be identified. Either change everything so that my personal being can not be identified or delete the photo. Why is this so hard. I took this photo and now I would like to have it removed for privacy reasons. I will gladly upload same photo whitout personal information if that will make you guys comply. DavidMelby (talk) 07:45, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Moved the file to File:Peblinge Lake, Nørrebro.jpg without a redirect. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 06:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Aafi and Fitindia: Can we global rename vanish the nominator? I've already stripped the watermark and metadata. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:59, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@The Squirrel Conspiracy, yes, as long as they do not plan to return, this meets the criterion. However, still the logs would be there, and that might need an oversight. Regards, Aafi (talk) 07:10, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Aafi: I think with these DRs it's safe to assume they want to vanish. Please do it. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 19:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@The Squirrel Conspiracy: ✓ Done However, the old username remains here and in the logs. Regards, Aafi (talk) 20:02, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doute sur les droits d'auteur : aucune source indiquant l'autorisation de publication sous CC-BY-SA 4.0 Mickaël en résidence (talk) 08:09, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour,
Merci de laisser cette photo en tête de page Wikipédia de Brigitte Lecordier, Elle appartient à Brigitte Lecordier Production,
Belle journée,
BLProd. 2A04:CEC0:109B:F406:DC33:BBFF:FEEA:EFF0 08:35, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bonjour,
Pour que ce soit fait, il faut que le photographe, Tom Grossin, envoie une autorisation expresse par courriel, à l'adresse [email protected]. Vous trouverez des exemples sur la page Commons:Messages type. Je vous remercie et vous souhaite une bonne journée, Mickaël en résidence (talk) 13:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unused cutout of a history map, no author/source information, false license: PCP because of possible CopyVio Enyavar (talk) 08:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Totally biased and unsourced material. 2A02:586:C427:BF62:B03C:238F:3981:8691 19:39, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: in use. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:41, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused map without indication about that is despicted (locator map of North Macedonia, and multiple dots about the it) Enyavar (talk) 08:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by WFCHBK (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Images are EXIF watermarked as "Copyright holder ©Mathieu Pasero" and "Tommaso Pelagalli / SprintCyclingAgency, Source BettiniPhoto©" respectively.

Belbury (talk) 08:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Images of a Kuwaiti building uploaded by Tnrajab (talk · contribs)

[edit]

These are images of the Tareq Rajab Museum which is located in Kuwait. Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Kuwait, there is no freedom of panorama for buildings.

Whpq (talk) 03:35, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Tnrajab (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Copyright murkiness. It's extraordinarily hard to believe that, as claimed by "self", a single person took family and other photographs, in both intimate and formal settings, of one man from the 1950s to the 1990s, and that this photographer is still with us, uploading to Commons.

Hoary (talk) 08:34, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 08:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by TuckerDaniels (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Purchased headshots - needs VRT to keep

Gbawden (talk) 08:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by MartinHero13 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused personal image. Out of project scope.

File:Wondershare Filmora X projekti leht alustamine.png is a screenshot of software. I guess that permission is needed

Estopedist1 (talk) 09:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused file. Single uploading by the user. No EXIF-data (or no satisfactory EXIF-data). Unlike that own work. Deletion per COM:PCP Estopedist1 (talk) 09:03, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

removal required. 99% repeats Sev Berd 125.jpg Well-read MountainMan (talk) 09:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

removal required. 99% repeats Sev Berd 026.jpg Well-read MountainMan (talk) 09:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by 59rami (talk · contribs)

[edit]

None of these are own work as claimed. No exif, PCP

Gbawden (talk) 09:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated Zheng Zhou (talk) 09:30, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is an outdated image created by me many years ago. Zheng Zhou (talk) 09:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is an outdated image created by me many years ago Zheng Zhou (talk) 09:31, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a photo taken by me many years ago, better images have been uploaded therefore this one's no longer needed. Zheng Zhou (talk) 09:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a photo taken by me many years ago, better images have been uploaded therefore this one's no longer needed. Zheng Zhou (talk) 09:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no author no permission protected logo from company - see https://www.smarketing-akademie.de Hoyanova (talk) 09:35, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These three German Notgeld (emergency money) bills from the 1920s are works of Ernst Janetzky, who died in 1958. So they are not in the public domain in Germany yet, and the files should be deleted. They can be restored in 2029.

Rosenzweig τ 10:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Unused personal selfie, out of the project scope Nutshinou Talk! 11:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Edwki (talk · contribs)

[edit]

I cannot verify the CC claim. The one of Greason is from https://www.bowdoin.edu/president/past-presidents/greason.html which makes no mention of CC. These are commissioned works which likely need the permission of the artist. The one of Stills was painted by Leopold Gould Seyffert who died 1956, so free soon but not now

Gbawden (talk) 11:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by VNW060222 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Old photos, none of these are own work as claimed

Gbawden (talk) 11:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is obviously not the work of the uploader, but the corporate work of the company, but the logo was designed in 1914 and is in the public domain at least in the United States. Australia has almost no minimum threshold for copyright protection. As far as the design is concerned, it is protected by copyright in Australia, but the logo may have entered the public domain long ago because it was designed too long ago. Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 11:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination: There is sufficient evidence to prove that the logo is in the public domain in both the United States and Australia. Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 11:21, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dopplung zur bereits bestehenden "Wappen von Niedersachsen.svg", welches in besserer Qualität ist eine kleinere Dateigröße hat. Estexx (talk) 11:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused personal selfie for non-contributor (uk:Спеціальна:Внесок/Людмила Касьянова), out of the project scope Nutshinou Talk! 11:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personal photo for non-Wikipedian. Out of scope Mohammdaon (talk) 11:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personal photo for non-Wikipedian. Out of scope Mohammdaon (talk) 11:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personal photo for non-Wikipedian. Out of scope Mohammdaon (talk) 11:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lyrics by Argentine musician Luis Alberto Spinetta (1950-2012) are still protected in its country of origin (70 years pma). We can undelete in 2083. Günther Frager (talk) 11:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama: not covering photographs of maps. This map likely not created by local government. TentingZones1 (talk) 12:03, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The source for this photograph leads to Telegram, a messaging and social media app. This source for this photograph and its context is unsubstantiated and not corroborated. Considering the nature of this page this photo is inappropriate and dangerous without proper context and evidence. It should be removed or replaced immediately. Connorjtmiles (talk) 12:39, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Incorrect structure, replaced by File:In2O.svg. Nucleus hydro elemon (talk) 12:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

from astridlindgren.com. Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 13:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{BadJPG}}, replaced by File:Diars-3D-balls-B.png. Nucleus hydro elemon (talk) 13:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CopyVio of a TV series Enyavar (talk) 13:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Na fotografii jsem objektem a nesouhlasím s jejím zveřejněním. Jezerka88 (talk) 13:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Na fotografii jsem objektem a nesouhlasím s jejím zveřejněním. Jezerka88 (talk) 13:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Na fotografii jsem objektem a nesouhlasím s jejím zveřejněním. Jezerka88 (talk) 13:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Na fotografii jsem objektem a nesouhlasím s jejím zveřejněním. Jezerka88 (talk) 13:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep.Byl na veřejné novinářské projekci. Svojí účastí souhlasil s focením. Simca 14:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Ano, je to sám Hrušínský. Nebo někdo z jeho divadla.
Já osobně bych fotky nechal. Byl na novinářské projekci nebo na křestu. S focením určitě souhlasil. Simca 13:13, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Jo, Jan Hrušinský se zbláznil. Asi nechce, aby o něm svět věděl, jaký je to d*****.. Simca 14:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
To může říct kde kdo. Kateřina Bláhová,Jan Hrušínský, Matouš Ruml nebo Jana Bernášková ?
Je to už 10 let, kdy jste byl(a) na novinářské projekci... Simca 13:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Na fotografii jsem objektem a nesouhlasím s jejím zveřejněním. Jezerka88 (talk) 13:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep.Byl na veřejné novinářské projekci. Svojí účastí souhlasil s focením. Simca 14:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Na fotografii jsem objektem a nesouhlasím s jejím zveřejněním. Jezerka88 (talk) 13:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Na fotografii jsem objektem a nesouhlasím s jejím zveřejněním. Jezerka88 (talk) 13:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep.Byl na veřejné novinářské projekci. Svojí účastí souhlasil s focením. Simca 14:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Na fotografii jsem objektem a nesouhlasím s jejím zveřejněním. Jezerka88 (talk) 13:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep.Byl na veřejné novinářské projekci. Svojí účastí souhlasil s focením. Simca 14:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Na fotografii jsem objektem a nesouhlasím s jejím zveřejněním. Jezerka88 (talk) 13:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pokud objekt vystupující jako neregistrovaný přispěvatel "Jezerka88" po 9 letech od zveřejnění reportážní fotografie dodatečně nesouhlasí s jejím zveřejněním (přestože neporušuje pravidla W. Commons), držitel autorských práv nemá námitek/připomínek. Nechť Wikimedia Commons postupuje standardním způsobem a v závěru i foto třeba odstraní. Toto stanovisko se týká i dalších fotografií, které "Jezerka88" dodatečně komentuje. Zdraví --David Sedlecký (talk) 17:34, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Na fotografii jsem objektem a nesouhlasím s jejím zveřejněním. Jezerka88 (talk) 13:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Na fotografii jsem objektem a nesouhlasím s jejím zveřejněním. Jezerka88 (talk) 13:23, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EXIF credits this to Michael Frank Franz; a Flickr user exists with this name with a gallery of what looks like this cat (https://www.flickr.com/photos/nwater/albums/72157629381088661/), most or all of which are CC-NC, although I can't see this particular photo in it.

Uploader username does not match Franz or his Flickr name. User also uploaded a different user's copyrighted Flickr photo as own-work CC-BY, and a picture of Michael Jordan taken from the internet. Belbury (talk) 13:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Speedy delete as copyvio of https://www.flickr.com/photos/nwater/13287267105/. 0x0a (talk) 22:56, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is an Appendix of this text that I uploaded later. Paperoastro (talk) 13:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copied from https://web.archive.org/web/20060331225210/https://brainmuseum.org/Specimens/primates/human/brain/human8sect6.jpg . No evidence of free license at the source site. Also ticket:2024071610000082. Ankry (talk) 14:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused photo with no meaningful explanation.No educational value. Malcolma (talk) 14:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Weak keep: A relatively detailed photo of printed coarse fabric, showing both printed and unprinted sections illuminated from two different angles, certainly isn't realistically useless. Sinigh (talk) 13:56, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot from an Italian movie released in 1980. It is currently in the public domain in its country of origin (20 years after creation), but it was not in 1996 at URAA time. Thus, it is still copyrighted in the US. Following COM:PCP we cannot keep it. Günther Frager (talk) 14:13, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Photo taken in Italy in 1980. It is currently in the public domain in its country of origin (20 years after creation), but it was not in 1996 at URAA time. Thus, it is still copyrighted in the US. Following COM:PCP we cannot keep it. Günther Frager (talk) 14:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Do we know him? 186.175.156.30 14:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photo taken in Italy in 1980. It is currently in the public domain in its country of origin (20 years after creation), but it was not in 1996 at URAA time. Thus, it is still copyrighted in the US. Following COM:PCP we cannot keep it. Günther Frager (talk) 14:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Violation of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope#PDF_and_DjVu_formats Images should be uploaded using native image format (tif, jpg, etc.) and not as PDF documents.

Ankry (talk) 14:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC) What's the reason to delete the image? Is about the resolution? This image is the view of the artist face — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.164.144.50 (talk) 13:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Permission needed. 186.175.156.30 14:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot 186.175.156.30 14:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook 186.175.156.30 14:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused text image, out of scope. P 1 9 9   14:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This text from a sign was posted at the edge of the lake; he brings knowledge about the fish in the lake. I have difficulty understanding this deletion request. Cjp24 (talk) 15:40, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If this info is really needed, it should be added as text to the article about the lake. Per COM:PS: "Excluded educational content includes: ... Files that contain nothing educational other than raw text." --P 1 9 9   18:56, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Four fish names with their size and weight, no verb: it's not really text.
On the other hand, we find a quantity of unused texts in Category:Texts.
A (short) list of large fish caught in a large, heavily visited lake is useful information.
--Cjp24 (talk) 04:35, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blurry object MNXANL (talk) 14:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

from 15min.lt. Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 14:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

fictionnal + not in use => out of com:scope 2A01:CB00:12B7:3000:5C43:3B64:2C0A:25E5 14:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

fictionnal + not in use => out of com:scope 2A01:CB00:12B7:3000:5C43:3B64:2C0A:25E5 14:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Adkrish22290 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Low quality low resolution images. Likely copied from internet.

-- DaxServer (talk) 15:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photo taken in Italy in 1981. It is currently in the public domain in its country of origin (20 years after creation), but it was not in 1996 at URAA time. Thus, it is still copyrighted in the US. Following COM:PCP we cannot keep it. Günther Frager (talk) 15:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Photo taken in Italy in the 1980s. It is currently in the public domain in its country of origin (20 years after creation), but it was not in 1996 at URAA time. Thus, it is still copyrighted in the US. Following COM:PCP we cannot keep it. Günther Frager (talk) 15:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 15:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fill still from the Italian film Il vizietto II released in 1980. Notice that {{PD-Italy}} only covers simple photographs and still frames (not the same as a film still)., this is clearly not the case as it is completely staged. Artistic photographs are protected for 70 years pma. Regardless of the current copyright status in Italy, it was copyrighted in in 1996 at URAA time. Thus, it has its copyright restored in the US. Following COM:PCP we cannot keep it. Notice that {{Not-PD-US-URAA}} should only be used for files uploaded prior to March 1, 2012. Günther Frager (talk) 15:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete The 2014 URAA statement is outdated and was superseded by later discussions. The current status quo is that a US copyright restored by the URAA absolutely can be the sole reason for deletion. --Rosenzweig τ 12:05, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no source, never used and irrelevant to Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by User-9514879641 (talk • contribs) 12:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot from the Italian 'film Tre fratelli released in 1981. It is currently in the public domain in its country of origin (20 years after creation), but it was not in 1996 at URAA time. Thus, it is still copyrighted in the US. Following COM:PCP we cannot keep it. Günther Frager (talk) 15:40, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Photo taken in Italy in 1981. It is currently in the public domain in its country of origin (20 years after creation), but it was not in 1996 at URAA time. Thus, it is still copyrighted in the US. Following COM:PCP we cannot keep it. Günther Frager (talk) 15:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Watermark indicated "X Chỉ Đạo", I doubt this is a stock photo instead of uploader's own work A1Cafel (talk) 16:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot from an Italian movie released in 1981. The movie was release in 1983 in the US the copyrighted notice was present in the opening credits [1]. Thus it is still copyrighted in US Günther Frager (talk) 16:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Screenshot from an Italian movie released in 1981 (description states 1983). The image was taken from the US trailer of the movie. The usage of {{PD-US-1989}} is incorrect, the copyright notice appears at the end [2]: Copyright MCMLXXXIII by Aquarius Associated(?) All rights reserved. Günther Frager (talk) 16:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 16:13, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

from Facebook. Unlike that own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 16:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unused file. Easily re-creatable if needed Estopedist1 (talk) 16:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 16:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unused file. Out of project scope. Estopedist1 (talk) 16:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the creator of this picture. These coats of arms doesn't exist for this commune in France. It's a mistake, thus supress it. Bzh-99 (talk) 16:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

appears screen-grabbed from a television broadcast (if for no other reason, due to the "live" bar in the upper righthand corner). Delete for license laundering SecretName101 (talk) 16:34, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It has been fixed IX1922 (talk) 10:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All from Category:Paintings depicting Xiongnu in the Henan Museum:

IDs and descriptions for the above 28 paintings were all found on the Henan Provincial Museum website. Some of the artists have names that match older artists whose work might be in the public domain, but I believe they are all living (or at least were living at the time of the 2012 museum exhibition) artists. Where I could find a likely record for them in the Chinese Artists Association membership listing, I've included the birth year above.

Four additional images are in the category and from the same photographer's Flickr account, but weren't found on the museum's website. Based on the rest of these and COM:PCP, I'm nominating them for deletion too even though artist/creation information has not yet been found.

There is a separate DR underway for File:Modu Chanyu A Warrior Leader.jpg.

The photographs themselves are properly released as CC0, but they are derivative works of copyrighted paintings (most likely) by living artists. If someone can more definitively ID the artists or otherwise determine that the paintings are older works in the public domain, I'd welcome it. —Tcr25 (talk) 16:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Cesar Trophy was created by the French sculptor César Baldaccini (1921–1998) in 1976 and therefore is still copyrighted. We can undelete these images in 2072 when its US copyright expires.

Günther Frager (talk) 16:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So does the Oscar statuette, made by artists died in 1960 and 1970 ? - Groupir ! (talk) 20:02, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The logo is nearly a copy of the logo from the Cesar Award webpage. Notice that the threshold of originality in France is extremely low. so the logo is likely copyrighted Moreover, the logo itself is a derivative work of the trophy designed by Cesar Baldaccini (1921–1998) that is also copyrighted. Günther Frager (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I won't dispute this request, yet I ask whether it is possible to draw a logo to represent César Award without infringing copyright.-- Carnby (talk) 19:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1975 East German bill. Not PD in Germany. Abzeronow (talk) 17:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is my own picture that i uploaded two years ago for fun. Now i feel that it should be deleted for my own online privacy. SB King72 (talk) 17:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete out of courtesy, not in use. --Achim55 (talk) 17:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Copyrighted website

Trade (talk) 17:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be the same map as the one deleted in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Eye colors map of Europe.png for being copyright infringement. As such, I am nominating it for deletion. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 17:54, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the source website no longer exists Wieralee (talk) 17:56, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative of https://stock.adobe.com/images/nostalgia/22101619 Rubýñ (Talk) 18:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike the other logos in Category:Atlantic Coast Conference logos, this one features much more elaborate imagery, and therefore is unlikely to meet the requirements of {{PD-textlogo}}. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 18:06, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think this logo is barely below COM:TOO US which is fairly high. Jonteemil (talk) 19:40, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not in use fictional flag, most like for personal use. Only upload by the user. See COM:PERSONAL Rubýñ (Talk) 18:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just uploaded by myself. However this is a duplicate of "File:Papanivirus+Virtovirus image.svg" Ernsts (talk) 18:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio: Photo by Klaus Erika Dietl. Unless the uploader is verified as being Mr Dietl himself, we would need Mr Dietl's permission. 2003:C0:8F12:CD00:30CB:A7B2:4CA1:F9ED 18:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio: Photo by Klaus Erika Dietl. Unless the uploader is verified as being Mr Dietl himself, we would need Mr Dietl's permission. 2003:C0:8F12:CD00:30CB:A7B2:4CA1:F9ED 18:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because it is quitely not sorted enough, the white jerseys supposed to be road. Jrnnf749nrn (talk) 18:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A cowboy? 186.175.112.152 18:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is Flint Rasmussen in scope? 186.175.112.152 18:26, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Golden Bear trophy is based on a sculpture of Renée Sintenis (1888-1965), thus it is still copyrighted in Germany, its country of origin. The original was created in 1932, we can undelete these files in 2036 when it enters in the German public domain.

Günther Frager (talk) 18:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Small version of Clint Corey.jpg 186.175.112.152 18:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oscar trophies are still copyrighted. On the original photo it is clearly de minimis, but cropping is not OK. Günther Frager (talk) 18:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio: Professional promo photo by Pierre Montavon, no permission. 2003:C0:8F12:CD00:30CB:A7B2:4CA1:F9ED 18:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Commenting this on VPC as well. Quick searches don't show this image anywhere else on the internet. I think it's reasonable to believe that the uploader could well be Pierre Montavon, considering that they've only uploaded works by Pierre Montavon which don't appear to be online elsewhere. D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 23:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Copyvio does not mean "This photo was taken from somewhere else on the internet". Copyvio means "We don't have the copyright holder's consent for this license".
Not sure why we would assume the uploader to be the photographer himself. The uploader disclosed paid editing on the German WP on behalf of Tête de Moine AOP, so most likely it's some advertising agency or company PR person who, as usual, got usage rights and copyright confused. --2003:C0:8F0C:7F00:E463:959B:59E6:A98 19:20, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given the blurryness of the logo, it is likely that the uploader took an existing image, not their "own work", and pasted it on a black background. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 18:58, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that's correct.
I did state when I uploaded the image it was my work with other input.
The BMW image was downloaded with permission from the website 'Freesupply' as a free to use and post at will.
This is their site (Car logos)
https://freebiesupply.com/s/car-logos/
I can upload a better copy if you wish,
Regards
Scaleboard99 2A00:23C8:4213:D400:9928:4CAE:91E1:6C4E 20:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Scaleboard99: Freesupply does not indicate that these files are released under an open license, just that they do not charge money to use them. The page you linked says "© 2024 Freebie Supply". Ahecht (TALK
PAGE
) 20:18, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The free license from the U.S. Army only covers the images, not the depicted sculptural works themselves. The works are part of the Three Dikgosi Monument, and authored by the same North Korean construction company (see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Botswana, Gaborone 3 Dikgosi Monument.jpg). As Botswana does not provide Freedom of Panorama, these U.S. Army-licensed images are all copyright infringements.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 19:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Copyright violation: publication of South Dakota state government, not the federal government. South Dakota is not one of the states that automatically releases all works into public domain. P1 (talk) 19:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope - unused personal image Mazbel (Talk) 19:20, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

this image was taken and given to me to use as a head shot Mjbg86 (talk) 21:43, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In use, so not OOS, but metadata says "photographer: peter nguyen". --Achim55 (talk) 16:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Because it is 로고 Ox1997cow (talk) 20:17, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --King of ♥ 05:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by non-notable youtuber; no usage, out of scope. (previous DR did not provide policy based reason, this is one) Gnomingstuff (talk) 19:31, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by KVUV (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Possible copyvio: The source does not indcate a creative commons, VRT requested https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wikimedia_VRT_release_generator

CoffeeEngineer (talk) 19:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Mbaye Boye (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Copyvio: photos of sculptures and artwork in Senegal (no commercial FOP - COM:FOP Senegal). It's possible that some of these works are old enough to be PD, but none of them are identified (all of the descriptions are simply the word "Français"!), so there's no viable way to determine that.

Omphalographer (talk) 19:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:SPAM, self promotional image; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 19:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Cikgu Rizal SMKSR (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Likely not own works: low-res/web-size images, visual characteristics suggest screengrabs. And not-notable, out of scope.

P 1 9 9   19:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

com:complex logos.

RZuo (talk) 20:02, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

The photograph fails to meet the official guidelines of COM:TOYS, specifically:

When uploading a picture of a toy, you must show that the toy is in the public domain in both the United States and in the source country of the toy. In the United States, copyright is granted for toys even if the toy is ineligible for copyright in the source country.

The focus of this photograph is a toy for which there is no evidence of copyright status, something that could be easily rectified by checking the label.

For an in-depth background and explanation of Commons copyright policies, refer to the Stuffed Animals essay and the precedent of prior closely related deletion requests:

  1. Petit tigre
  2. Erminig
  3. Wendy the Weasel & Percy Plush
  4. Wikimania 2014 Day 1
  5. Jimmy Wales meeting Mr Penguin

(talk) 21:08, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Most of them per nomination. Kept the one per above. Even by my, admittedly rather strict, interpretation of de minimis that appears to fit the policy. --Majora (talk) 01:27, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative work of the Minions from the Despicable Me film series

Trade (talk) 20:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unused logo of possibly not notable entity. Out of project scope. Estopedist1 (talk) 21:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unused file. Promotional. Out of project scope. Estopedist1 (talk) 21:16, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

from kumparan.com. Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 21:23, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

copyvio. the uploader claim that cropped from doi:10.11501/9537597.the book publieshed 1978. eien20 (talk) 21:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: images and videos related to a film previously deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Experimental movie - Mannequin Horror Doll.webm. (I've left out some files in this category which might have value outside the scope of this film.)

Omphalographer (talk) 21:30, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Speedy delete: Having seen them in part and the now-deleted one earlier, I find both pointless. - THV | | U | T - 11:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC); edited: 11:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

from Internet. Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 21:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Yodo007 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused low quality personal images for non-contributor

Nutshinou Talk! 21:37, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unused file. Random food products. Possibly COM:PACKAGING. Estopedist1 (talk) 21:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

from tanssiin.fi. Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 21:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unused file. Personal statistics of someone's trips. Out of project scope. Estopedist1 (talk) 21:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unused file, possibly not notable person. Out of project scope. Estopedist1 (talk) 21:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

different sources. Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 22:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Along with File:Nikoaaltonen.jpg--Estopedist1 (talk) 22:01, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Low quality AI image (nonsense neckpiece, pants). Uploaded for use in a uk.wiki article on the "alt girl" subculture, and I replaced it with an actual photo. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @The Squirrel Conspiracy. I don't see a big problem with the "original" neckpiece or the "torn" pants. I actually saw these flaws but decided they were minor and fitting for a character that goes against the mainstream. Before generating an image with AI, I looked for an alternative on Commons and Flickr. I was searching for the typical style of an alt-girl based on article sources: oversized clothes, heavy boots, and wide pants. The photo you proposed might be the best we have on Commons at the moment (and I was considering using it: bright hair, black clothes, etc.), but it's a photo of a mature woman taken five years before the alt-girl trend became a thing. I'd prefer to have the AI image until we find a photo of an actual alt-girl for replacement. Mike.Khoroshun (talk) 23:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not a fashion expert, but it seems to me that alt girl is just a new name for what goths wore in the 1990s and 2000s, so the age of the photo doesn't bother me. As for the neckpiece, it's chainmail where the chains don't actually link and it looks like the model is decapitated right above them. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does the body proportions seems off or is that just me? Trade (talk) 00:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The boot looks all wrong to me. Tall boots exist, but this looks more like a regular height boot that's been sized up, instep and all.  Delete as giant novelty boots are presumably not a part of the aesthetic. Belbury (talk) 11:48, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


I'm not really sure whether the full on graphic depiction of a flying bird can be considered as "simple geometric shapes or text". 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 22:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

see: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Queen-Ugobeze.jpg BlinxTheKitty (talk) 22:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Queen-Ugobeze.jpg BlinxTheKitty (talk) 22:29, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photo published in the Italian magazine Playmen in 1977. It is currently in the public domain in its country of origin, but it was not in 1996 at URAA time. Thus, it is currently copyrighted in the US. Notice that {{Not-PD-US-URAA}} can only be applied to files uploads prior March 1, 2012. Following COM:PCP, we cannot keep it. Günther Frager (talk) 22:47, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Any scope here? Own work? 186.172.147.169 22:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete unused, problem user, likely sockpuppetry involved. Taylor 49 (talk) 23:17, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Cwc123 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope, unused promotional material: en:User:Cwc123/sandbox

Nutshinou Talk! 23:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete per nom. I've also tagged the enwiki sandbox for deletion. (If it's already been deleted: it was documentation for a piece of commercial software, written in a somewhat promotional tone.) Omphalographer (talk) 01:10, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by %USER% as no permission D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 23:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep - Obviously not a speedy delete. Seems almost certain to be another (at least claim of) own work by User:Vorzwickel; compare File:ASO Orchesterfoto 1920.png. D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 23:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get this. You turn my "permission requested" tag into a deletion nomination, and then, after nominating it for deletion, you say "keep"?
Neither do I get your comment "Permission for this file is obvious or is not required". Why wouldn't it be? German copyright law is applicable for this photo. Only a natural person can be copyright holder by that law, not a whole orchestra. So the claim that the whole orchestra is copyright holder is false. So, who is the author and copyright holder? --2003:C0:8F26:1200:C53B:D20D:AE05:D066 12:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a nomination (really by you), rather than a no-discussion uncontested/undiscussed deletion.
While a corporation may not be able to own a copyright under German law, that is not necessarily relevant. This image has the "own work" tag and thus the uploader has claimed it is his own work; the "author" field in a Commons information form is not of legal relevance; if the user uploaded it and really did create it, it is validly licensed. The CC licenses also allow for the licensor to provide for any attribution they'd like, and this does not need to match the name of the actual person who owns the copyright. D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 16:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]