Commons:Deletion requests/2024/11/28

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

November 28

[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Intervex as no permission (No permission since) Montanabw (talk) 00:12, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I already informed you on your talk page (User_talk:Montanabw#File_tagging_File:Flag_of_the_Blackfeet_Nation.jpg), first nations can and do copyright their flags. This flag is above Threshold of Originality by the standards of US copyright law (for example, the Peoria Tribe logo is a registered copyright with the US copyright office). Given this flag was created in 1980 [1] and is above TOO, the default assumption to make is that it is copyrighted. I flagged it as no permission because I could find no evidence that the Blackfeet have released their flag with a free license. Best, Intervex (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question works that are edicts of government, local or foreign, are public domain in the US per § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices. Is a first nations tribe considred a government? I would argue it is, therefore this is PD. Dmartin969 (talk) 03:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The article you linked to applies to "Edicts of government, such as judicial opinions, administrative rulings, legislative enactments, public ordinances, and similar official legal documents are not copyrightable for reasons of public policy. This applies to such works whether they are Federal, State, or local as well as to those of foreign governments." and the actual Copyright Law you link to says "The doctrine is based on the principle “that no one can own the law.". As I understand it, this applies to *textual* laws, bylaws, judicial rulings, etc. I don't see why this would apply to flags.
    Dozens of first nations living within what is now the US have registered their flags with the US copyright office (e.g. Shawnee, Lumbee, Nez Percé, Pamunkey), Rosebud Sioux). Intervex (talk) 20:02, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Native American tribes in the United States that are federally recognized, which is true of the Blackfeet Nation, are dependent sovereign nations in the USA. Hence this is the official flag of a government/nation. I am troubled that while American state and local flags seeem to be fine, regardless ofmcopyright, you are singling out Native people. Compare Flags_of_Native_Americans_of_the_United_States where it appears several flags are being questioned, to Flags of counties and municipalities in the United States where there appears to be no dispute. This is a sovereignty issue--I would presume many entities with a flag will copyrught the design for any number of reasons, yet it is still an official symbol... do we eliminate all copyrighted flags from commons? That seems a ridiculous outcome! Montanabw (talk) 06:15, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Copyrighted flags should not be on Commons. The scope of Commons is clearly defined as freely licensed media only (See: Commons:Project scope, also COM:CARES). I think the municipalities *should* be checked for copyright violations. I have been actively checking the copyright status of the Indigenous flags because I realized so many of them are copyright violations. In response to your talk page comment: I am not singling this one flag out - I have been systematically going through all of the Indigenous flags on Commons that are affected by US and Canadian copyright law. I don't have the bandwidth to also be checking municipal flags but others really should, because it is unambiguous Commons policy that copyright violations should be removed. Which is why hundreds of copyright violating municipal flags have already been deleted from Commons. Intervex (talk) 07:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is also same why we had to transfer the municipal flags to the Wikipedias. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 13:36, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unofficial, and unused Strenatos (talk) 00:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

and yes i made the file Strenatos (talk) 00:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Collage of low resolution, watermarked images, while beautiful, are unused. Not certain whether original images are on Commons Bastique ☎ let's talk! 00:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Collage of low resolution, watermarked images, while beautiful, are unused. Not certain whether original images are on Commons Bastique ☎ let's talk! 00:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: unused AI-generated image of a turtle happily swimming along in a plastic bag. (Plastic pollution is a real problem for sea turtles, but this image doesn't represent it in an accurate manner.) Omphalographer (talk) 00:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete with no COM:EDUSE. Belbury (talk) 11:28, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 00:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Dalopeza9 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 00:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Speedy delete self promotion Atomicdragon136 (talk) 04:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Qbeacham (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 00:55, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Speedy delete self promotion Atomicdragon136 (talk) 04:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


This file was initially tagged by Intervex as Dw no source since (dw no source since)

This should be discussed since multiple Wikipedias use it. Abzeronow (talk) 01:05, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Right, so I can't find a source for this flag being freely licensed. The sourcing I've found about the seal in the middle of the flag is that it was created in 1957 [2] and its author died in 2019 [3]. If anybody can find evidence of a free license that'd be welcome, as I haven't had any luck. I'm unfortunately getting the sense this flag will have to be transferred to Wikipedia with a nonfree use justification. Intervex (talk) 01:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Works published in the United States in 1957 needed to be published with a copyright notice and renewed in 1984 or 1985 to still be in copyright. Abzeronow (talk) 01:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I have had no success trying to track down when the flag was made, only when the seal used in the flag was made. I do not know if the seal was published with a copyright notice. Intervex (talk) 01:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If this is deleted, we could reupload it to the English Wikipedia. Deal? SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 20:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep License changed to PD-EdictGov. Dmartin969 (talk) 03:45, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • A flag is not an edict of government, and in the US, non-federal government works such as those from the Osage Nation can be copyrighted. As said above, it can be public domain for other reasons. Abzeronow (talk) 18:19, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Assuming the copyright *of the seal* was not renewed, am I correct that the *seal* would be {{PD-US-not renewed}}? Based on this assumption, my understanding is the *flag* would be below TOO as its only complex visual element is the seal (so {{PD-inelegible}} or similar). But: How can we be sure the seal was not renewed? I have searched the US copyright office database for Osage and renewals and did not see anything, but my understanding is that a lack of a record in their online system does not mean a lack of copyright. Intervex (talk) 20:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Early 20th century postcard by Louis Émile Choque of Epernay. Choque was born in 1856 but I cannot find a death date and him living to 100 is not implausible. Would need to narrow down publication date to determine if we can keep this. Abzeronow (talk) 01:45, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1955 painting by Richard F. Lack (1928-2009), an American. More information about the provenance of this painting needed to determine if public domain or copyrighted until 2080. Abzeronow (talk) 01:56, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused low quality non-photographic jpg of an US Army emblem. Is this worth keeping? Abzeronow (talk) 02:02, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Detegehuqa (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 02:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Abdulmuqtaddirkhan (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 02:45, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 02:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 02:48, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Rodrigo Sahd (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 02:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 02:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Speedy delete self promotion Atomicdragon136 (talk) 04:57, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


"Hans Peter" is 2 individual given names, not a compound one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hjart (talk • contribs) 13:00, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Mughal125 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 02:58, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 03:03, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP in Romania, sculptor Oscar Han died in 1976

A1Cafel (talk) 03:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP in Romania, sculptor Oscar Han died in 1976

A1Cafel (talk) 03:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP in Romania, sculptor Oscar Han died in 1976

A1Cafel (talk) 03:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP in Romania, sculptor Oscar Han died in 1976

A1Cafel (talk) 03:20, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The statue was completed in 1939 by Oscar Han (1891–1976). There is no freedom of panorama in Romania. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2047.

A1Cafel (talk) 03:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The statue was completed in 1939 by Oscar Han (1891–1976). There is no freedom of panorama in Romania. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2047.

A1Cafel (talk) 03:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The statue was completed in 1934 by Oscar Han (1891–1976). There is no freedom of panorama in Romania. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2047.

A1Cafel (talk) 03:25, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by SuraphelB (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 03:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 2D works in China A1Cafel (talk) 03:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 2D works in China A1Cafel (talk) 03:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 2D works in China A1Cafel (talk) 03:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 2D works in China A1Cafel (talk) 03:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 2D works in China A1Cafel (talk) 03:40, 28 November 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.

{{FoP-China}} didn't apply to indoor artworks in 2015. 03:47, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Unsure This depends entirely on whether the amendment to Chinese copyright law applies to derivative works created prior to the amendment's entry into force. I don't see any indication either way at COM:FOP China, which I suppose might counsel a delete on COM:PRP grounds. Still, the legal issue with FOP shouldn't be the state of the law when the derivative work was created, but what the current state of the law is. As such I am unsure. (see below) 69.174.144.79 17:34, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Delete per JWilz12345. There is insufficient compliance with the requirements for FOP in China. We needn't reach the issue of retroactive application of the new Chinese FOP standards. To the extent it matters, it's worth noting that this image is pretty blurry at maximum zoom, to the point that much of the text is unreadable. I think this should be taken as an additional factor counseling deletion. 69.174.144.79 13:45, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep per renewed COM:FOP China which included indoor works. --A1Cafel (talk) 16:36, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete, no attribution to artists. While COM:FOP China now covers indoor works and the graphic work there is inside a museum (which is normally publicly-accessible premises), Chinese FOP requires attribution. Who were the artists of the graphic work? The law seems silent on copyrighted anonymous works in public places. Already-deleted images of similar cases were recently denied restoration notwithstanding broader Chinese FOP. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:19, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Keep I found out the artist is named Wang Qingrui. His name was actually shown on the far right of the photo, though the resolution was awful. Two additional sources are available to verify his authorship, including a newspaper interview[1] and a blogpost written by his studio.[2] Lovewhatyoudo (talk) 14:21, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1. 苏日娜. "故土牵情 有一种情愫叫方言". 北方新报. Archived from the original on 2021-12-26.
  2. 王清锐. 难活、麻求烦,呼市方言漫画全集. 清锐出品.

Kept: Keep per User:Lovewhatyoudo - Disagree with this closure? If one wishes to renominate this file, they are able to do so. I will defer to other administrators to review it. This is my final decision, so please do not take it to my talk page or ping me unless it’s technical issue. Thanks for assuming good faith and happy holidays!. --Missvain (talk) 22:24, 27 December 2021 (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.

Nominate again. {{FoP-China}} didn't include indoor works before 2021. 02:53, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning towards  Keep this time. Notwithstanding the issue of retroactivity (which must be sent to COM:VP/C or Commons talk:Copyright rules by territory/China), there is already proper attribution to the author who created the 2D graphic works. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:15, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per discussion. --Ellywa (talk) 21:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP for 2D works in China A1Cafel (talk) 03:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Weak keep No new argument since the original nomination in 2021 Atomicdragon136 (talk) 04:38, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP for 2D works in China A1Cafel (talk) 03:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 2D works in China A1Cafel (talk) 03:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 2D works in China A1Cafel (talk) 03:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 03:46, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Probable deletion, but absolutely not a speedy. This is a pretty big panorama, so a de minimis argument can be made. I doubt it mainly because of the Mazda ad, and also probably the "souvenirs" sign and Girls ad, but I'd like to know which photos of Times Square would be kept if nominated for deletion. Is it possible to take a photo that shows lots of ads that is considered de minimis for any one ad? Because that's what Times Square is and has been for a long time. Do all photos of Times Square have to be uploaded locally to Wikipedias and Wikivoyages that allow fair use? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:07, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for "graphic works" in the United Kingdom A1Cafel (talk) 03:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


personal logo, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 03:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Junipherbavi (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 04:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 04:05, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Sourabhnetleaf123 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 04:05, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Ashwina Bramhe (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 04:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in Lithuania A1Cafel (talk) 04:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in Lithuania A1Cafel (talk) 04:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Unlikely to be own work. Doing a reverse image search, this image appears on several websites and social media posts (although I do not know Japanese). The distortion suggests it is likely a picture taken of a computer screen. Atomicdragon136 (talk) 04:35, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

この画像は、私、生麦ビール本人が地下鉄博物館に行き、デジタルカメラで撮影した物を、タブレットに直接撮影した物を撮り、Wikipediaコモンズに載せたものです。決して他のサイトから転用した画像では無いので、どうか削除しないよう、お願い致します。 生麦ビール (talk) 22:46, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 04:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Weak delete OK photo with usable elements, but we have other photos of this lake and the fountain in it. It would be fine to keep the photo, but it's not objectionable to delete it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:10, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 3D works in Russia A1Cafel (talk) 04:38, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Sasha Grygoriak (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST.

Mitte27 (talk) 04:38, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Looks like lots of photos of this one guy. Not needed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP in Latvia, sculptor Parsla Zalkalne died in 1993 A1Cafel (talk) 04:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP in Latvia, sculptor Marta Lange died in 1985 A1Cafel (talk) 04:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP in Latvia, sculptor Marta Lange died in 1985 A1Cafel (talk) 04:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The monument was completed in 1971 by Valdis Albergs (1922–1984). There is no freedom of panorama in Latvia. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2055 A1Cafel (talk) 04:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The monument was completed in 1971 by Valdis Albergs (1922–1984). There is no freedom of panorama in Latvia. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2055 A1Cafel (talk) 04:48, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


 Delete I wasn't aware of lack of freedom of panorama in Latvia. --Sebastian Wallroth (talk) 16:03, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source of this file points to another file hosted on the French Wikipedia, with a clearly different license. This is obvious license laundering. Taichi (talk) 05:03, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep this logo it's a only text ,below too (google translator) AbchyZa22 (talk) 08:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek:look (1990) AbchyZa22 (talk) 08:25, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see. This is the logo minus the parallel stripes that might be a problem per COM:TOO France. That source can be used for this logo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek:Yes but,this is a text logo. (only text is not copyrighted) (google translator) AbchyZa22 (talk) 08:58, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I already agreed with that above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:13, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The file uploaded in French Wikipedia included the text as Modèle:Marque déposée (non-free logo). The fact that it uses as a source a non-free file uploaded on the French Wikipedia does not help much. Taichi (talk) 22:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What fr.wikipedia thought about COM:TOO France isn't really relevant to our decision. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: The use of this source will be a topic of discussion in the future, I advocate changing the source and avoiding this double interpretation in the future, since your answer above seems to sound like an imposition, rather than a correction. Taichi (talk) 16:48, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I already supported adding a different source near the beginning of this thread. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep fix the license, keep the image. Bastique ☎ let's talk! 07:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Blurry and unused image, unlikely to be useful A1Cafel (talk) 05:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 05:33, 28 November 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.

Files uploaded by GreyViper17 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope: unused logos of various fictitious political parties and movements (only ever used in an enwiki sandbox).

Omphalographer (talk) 04:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete as out-of-scope, with no foreseeable educational use. Only "maybe" is File:Flag of greater indonesia by comrademaxwell dcl37hn-pre-removebg-preview (1).png, as it is a version of the Garuda Pancasila, but it has no clear source or author provided ("awdawdawdawdawdawd"?). ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 09:04, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those two are likely copyvios as well - the filenames indicate that they were downloaded from DeviantArt. Omphalographer (talk) 17:20, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 06:39, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by GreyViper17 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope: additional fictitious flags, emblems, etc.

Omphalographer (talk) 05:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Haraf13 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope: personal flags and flag variants.

Omphalographer (talk) 05:38, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 05:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 05:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Mnoiaroy2 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 05:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Ultra-close crop of face not used/necessary CzarJobKhaya (talk) 06:58, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep This media file may have been used in the past or currently outside of the Wikimedia Foundation projects anywhere on the web or as a part the content of publications or physical goods. This person is currently in the news and subject to broad commentary and discussion. This photo is certainlinly within scope per COM:SCOPE "from an educational point of view, for the sake of variety and availability of choice."
Also, @CzarJobKhaya per COM:NPOV: - (quotation)
"Media files"
"Commons is not Wikipedia, and files uploaded here do not necessarily need to comply with the Neutral point of view and No original research requirements imposed by many of the Wikipedia sites. Commons acts amongst other things as a common media file resource for all Wikimedia projects, and we stand apart from the rules that may be imposed locally by each of those individual projects."
"It is not the role of Commons to adjudicate on subject-matter disputes nor to force local projects to use one version of a file in preference to another. Provided that a file falls within Commons scope, and can be legally hosted, we make it available. Whether and under what conditions it is actually used is a matter for the local communities of the individual projects to decide."
"Images having particular national, political or religious significance including flags, emblems and maps can arouse strong passions, but Commons is not the place to decide which of various competing versions is the correct or official version. If you feel strongly that a map, emblem, flag or other file hosted here is "wrong" in some way, please try to persuade your local wiki community to make use of the version you prefer instead." -- Ooligan (talk) 07:53, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not used anywhere, as the file creator I request a speedy delete Stanloona2020 (talk) 07:13, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Freedom of Panorama for 2D character in China. 茅野ふたば (talk) 07:13, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Not used anywhere, as the file creator I request a speedy delete Stanloona2020 (talk) 07:13, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Freedom of Panorama for 2D character in China. 茅野ふたば (talk) 07:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Unused file, as file creator requesting a speedy delete Stanloona2020 (talk) 07:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Freedom of Panorama for 2D character in China. 茅野ふたば (talk) 07:20, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


There is no Freedom of Panorama for 2D character in China. 茅野ふたば (talk) 07:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


There is no Freedom of Panorama for 2D character in China. 茅野ふたば (talk) 07:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


There is no Freedom of Panorama for 2D poster in China. 茅野ふたば (talk) 07:21, 28 November 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.

Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:41, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:44, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Sahaib as no permission (No permission) Krd 07:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Sahaib as no permission (No permission) Krd 07:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a photoshopped image - the real observatory doesn't have this density of antennas. Look at any mapping software or Caltech's website. It is also clear from the image that the same antenna has been duplicated 6 times Blervis (talk) 07:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oops nevermind - can I delete this? Blervis (talk) 07:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The OVRO array had 6 antennas for many years, and that's what the image shows. I know. I used the array. I was there many times. It is not a photoshopped image. There were six antennas of identical design. Anyone who knows anything at all about radio interferometers would know that they are often composed of identical elements PopePompus (talk) 10:58, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Per uploader's answer. Density is a perspective effect of using a tele lens. Herbert Ortner (talk) 12:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Didym as no permission (No permission since) Krd 07:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


This was uploaded by a user with no other contributions and was linked on only one medical article. It is clearly just someone's medical fetish and, due to it's poor quality, serves no purpose other than to arouse the author. Starfishprime1989 (talk) 07:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete: Absolutely no COM:EDUSE. --Achim55 (talk) 13:10, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the source of the flag is not reliable, causing historical obfuscation and even fake news. Muhamad Izzul Fiqih (talk) 07:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend we keep it but rename it to "Fictional Jambi Sultanate flag" Syazwi Irfan (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It can be considered, but further discussion is needed. Muhamad Izzul Fiqih (talk) 03:14, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Ruano Marina (talk · contribs)

[edit]

User with bad history, small files without EXIF data, unlikely to be own works.

Yann (talk) 07:46, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP in Lithuania, the subject died in 1969 so the creator of the monument is unlikely to be dead for 70 years A1Cafel (talk) 07:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Quite borderline, it is not clear if the license is valid. Yann (talk) 07:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete the texture is complex and IMO surpasses the US TOO. Perhaps a simpler version could be recreated. Bedivere (talk) 13:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment tbf isn't it likely this is AI-generated like the other DOGE images? --Nintendofan885T&Cs apply 16:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so. It does resemble some similar images (based on a Google search image) but this one's texture is what is problematic, not the design itself. Bedivere (talk) 17:32, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep The image is made of simple shapes and qualifies under {{PD-textlogo}}. The texture, in my opinion, is no more complex than File:Arkansas map by Sean Pecor.png, a confirmed-by-court case simple shape PD image, as both images have a "3d"-style shape/design and a not-smooth surface. P.S., including what Nintendofan885 stated above, given the other A.I.-generated images associated with DOGE, there is a high-chance this was also A.I.-generated. There is no proof of that, however, I feel like that also strengthens the PD-textlogo / simple-shape PD case for this photograph. WeatherWriter (talk) 16:35, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused logo of questionable notability, presumably uploaded for a deleted promotional article, possibly out of the project scope. Nutshinou Talk! 08:00, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP in Estonia, sculptor Ülo Õun died in 1988 A1Cafel (talk) 08:00, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Possible copyright violation: claimed own work but file EXIF shows "Copyright holder Paavo Lehtonen". VRT permission from Paavo Lehtonen needed. MKFI (talk) 08:09, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 08:12, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 08:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 08:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 08:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 08:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 08:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 08:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Per COM:PACKAGE A1Cafel (talk) 08:19, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Advertisement, out of scope A1Cafel (talk) 08:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Random AI-generated image, unlikely to be educationally useful A1Cafel (talk) 08:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Screenshot of non-free content A1Cafel (talk) 08:25, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 08:26, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Out of scope: Unused personal photo A1Cafel (talk) 08:34, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Nice portrait. Yann (talk) 08:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep per Yann. Excellent 3D separation, nice lighting and background. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Photo by Studio Verhassel from Belgium published in 1949. The protection for pseudoanonymous works is 70 yeas ppa, so it is currently in the public domain in its country of origin. However, it was not in 1996 at URAA time (notice that protection changed from 50 to 70 years in 1994). Thus, it is still copyrighted in the US. Following PCP we cannot keep it. Günther Frager (talk) 09:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Reproduction of a recent painting. The painter, Dimitris Alexandros Fatouros, died in 2020. The copyright duration in Greece is 70 years after the death of the creator, thus it should be undeleted in 2091. C messier (talk) 09:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Possible hoax image: Article where the image is used is nominated for deletion as a possible hoax. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 09:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Freedom of Panorama for 2D character in the United States of America. 茅野ふたば (talk) 09:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


unnötige Weiterleitung GeorgDerReisende (talk) 09:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unnötige Weiterleitung GeorgDerReisende (talk) 09:48, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unnötige Weiterleitung GeorgDerReisende (talk) 09:49, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unnötige Weiterleitung GeorgDerReisende (talk) 09:49, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP in Indonesia. 茅野ふたば (talk) 09:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


unnötige Weiterleitung GeorgDerReisende (talk) 09:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP in Indonesia. 茅野ふたば (talk) 09:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


unnötige Weiterleitung GeorgDerReisende (talk) 09:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

URV - ich habe leider erst nach dem Hochladen erfahren, dass der Künstler erst 1959 verstorben ist. Jenne1504 (talk) 10:13, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jenne1504: Was weiß man denn über diesen Künstler H. Hooff? In AKL und Wikidata habe ich nichts gefunden. --Rosenzweig τ 10:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rosenzweig: Ich habe u.a. Das hier gefunden, die Signatur passt. [4], nach „Hooff, Ernst Hans“ googlen bringt weitere Ergebnisse. —Jenne1504 (talk) 23:08, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cropped version of a portrait used in an FBI wanted poster. Original image is a non-federal work by Paul Hampartsoumian - REX/Shutterstock from the Daily Mail Hariboneagle927 (talk) 10:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Likely copyright violation - no evidence that Sofinance has released this material under CC0 or another free license/violation probable des droits d'auteur - manque d'évidence que Sofinance a publié ce materiel sous CC0 ou une autre licence libre. Redtree21 (talk) 10:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Too blurred to be of any use. Malcolma (talk) 10:56, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

non respect du droit d'auteur - appartient à les pictogrammes.com Editions Milmo Isabelle-ANDI (talk) 11:02, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

non respect des droits d'auteurs - propriété des editions milmo les pictogrammes.com Isabelle-ANDI (talk) 11:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

non respect des droits d'auteur - propriété des éditions milmo les pictogrammes.com Isabelle-ANDI (talk) 11:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected copyright violation: small resolution image, uploader has a history of copyvios. MKFI (talk) 11:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: no realistic educational value. Very poor quality image. Headlock0225 (talk) 11:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Out of scope: no realistic educational value. Very porr quality image. Headlock0225 (talk) 11:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Image of non-significant figure with no apparent purpose for upload, likely out-of-scope. Redtree21 (talk) 11:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


random image of dewy grass, uploader added large watermark. Out of scope. -- Deadstar (msg) 11:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Image of non-significant figure with no apparent purpose for upload, likely out-of-scope. Redtree21 (talk) 11:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Appears to be a test, duplicating File:Nuvola Algerian flag.svg (Algeria vs Algerian in title) CMD (talk) 11:53, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Freedom of Panorama in the Philippines, making these images infringements on the copyright of the tilapia sculpture designer. According to this source, the monument was inaugurated in 2005. Sculptor not named by the source.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 12:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Image of non-significant figure with no apparent purpose for upload, likely out-of-scope. Redtree21 (talk) 12:07, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Not like own work, probabily screenshot UltimoGrimm (talk) 12:19, 28 November 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.

Out of scope: abstract artwork imported from Flickr. No obvious educational use case.

Omphalographer (talk) 03:03, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 27 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.

Out of scope: as previously, abstract artwork imported from Flickr. No obvious educational use case.

Omphalographer (talk) 04:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:02, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope, as previously.

茅野ふたば (talk) 12:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete as per previous nominations. @Shizhao: Please stop importing files such as these from Flickr. They are not needed on Commons. Omphalographer (talk) 22:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Recent sculptures that date to 2015, and there is no Freedom of Panorama in the Philippines for free uses of such public artworks. The establishment appears to be the same one as this Facebook page, which posted about their opening date on April 28, 2015, so the sculptures were most likely inaugurated at the same year. Note that their last Facebook post announced about their indefinite closure (2021), and the establishment no longer appears on recent Google Street View imagery. As a result, it is debatable if these sculptures are eligible for the future Philippine FoP a year from now or two, which does not cover temporary works in public spaces.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 12:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


com:DW. De affiche is auteursrechtelijk beschermd. Toestemming van de maker dient gestuurd te worden naar VRT. トトト (talk) 12:34, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 12:34, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


DW, FoP doesn't apply, no permission Krd 12:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep per COM:FOP Germany. Perhaps the nominator might say why they claim this doesn't apply? Andy Dingley (talk) 16:13, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, what means "DW" and "FoP"?
The source is under cc-by-sa 2.0 license. Thiemo Schuff (talk) 15:41, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Starwhooper, DW means derivative work and FoP means freedom of Panorama. See COM:DW and COM:FOP. Ratekreel (talk) 20:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: I'm inclined to  Keep the file because it seems to be fine per FOP Germany. Unless the depicted work is not photographed from public place and not located in public place permanently, it should be fine here. Ratekreel (talk) 20:28, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uploads by User:Anpompe

[edit]

Most or all uploads are likely copyright violations. The uploader, Anpompe seems to be Andrej Pompe, the author of the works represented by the uploaded images, however none of those images themselves are his work as claimed. The book and album covers are more likely copyrighted by the publisher. Similarly, band photos are likely owned by either the whole band or the label. The most blatant case is File:Frutek oglas1.jpg, where the user claims copyright of a screenshot of a TV ad featuring his music, that one can be speedy-deleted. — Yerpo Eh? 12:55, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Speedy delete File:Dr. Andrej Pompe.png taken from Linkedin thus copyvio. VSD File:Frutek oglas1.jpg, made by Fructal, not PD in Slovenia. For the book covers, I believe they don't surpass COM:TOO, but slwiki doesn't have articles about them, so they are COM:OOS. I'll check other files later. A09 (talk) 14:48, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retouched picture, derivative of File:אנית המעפילים "שבתאי לוזינסקי" באשדוד-JNF029338.jpeg. Look at the clouds, which are way higher resolution than the rest of the photograph. מקף־עברי (talk) 13:20, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In hebrew it states that the picture is colorized. It is obvious as the date is 1947.
The picture is an authentic reflection of the original scenario, much more than the black and white one.
why it should be deleted? Pikiwiki - Israel free image collection project (talk) 13:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Shaula, since it is more of a retouched photo than a recolored one. I'm currently in the course of sorting recently uploaded photographs of Ashdod from the Pikiwiki project (and adding Template:KKLJNF); some of them seem to be GenAI-upscaled, therefore containing artifacts. (See previous versions of 1 & 2)
Regarding this picture, please notice the difference of resolutions, of the clouds and the rest of it. Also, the coloring seems a bit off. The small sand 'hill' in front of the soldiers is colored blue on the left. מקף־עברי (talk) 14:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence of own work. Only reference to the image I can find is at https://www.bridgemanimages.com/en/noartistknown/shah-wali-khan-uncle-of-the-king-of-afghanistan-and-his-son-ali-wali-khan-recovered-today-by-the/black-and-white-photograph/asset/1677669 TheBritinator (talk) 13:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file is part of a hoax, with its article (deleted in 2017), which is stated on the eligibility discussion page (wp:fr). Kontributor 2K (talk) 13:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Belaltaheri (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Not own works, some out of scope also

Юрий Д.К 13:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by User:Huawei CN

[edit]

Low resolution, poor quality and no EXIF information, most likely downloaded from Internet. --Tim Wu (talk) 14:02, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overexposed bad quality photo Pierre cb (talk) 14:20, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope used for cyberbullying on nl-wiki no author given also nor metadata Hoyanova (talk) 14:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Multiple copyright infringements, already individually excluded File:Metrô BH Praça da Estação.jpg Copyright infringement of Jornal Estado de Minas/D.A. Press/Edesio Ferreira https://www.em.com.br/app/noticia/cultura/2023/06/14/interna_cultura,1507183/bh-tera-edicao-da-rota-patrimonial-na-zona-cultural-praca-da-estacao.shtml///File:CCO Metrô BH.jpg Copyright infringement of Estado de Minas/Diários Associados/Larissa Figueiredo https://www.em.com.br/gerais/2024/07/6896586-obras-praticamente-dobram-intervalo-entre-trens-no-metro-de-bh.html Sorocabano 32 (talk) 14:34, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement by Metrô BH (© Metrô BH – Todos os direitos reservados) https://www.metrobh.com.br/sustentabilidade-metro-bh-inicia-a-instalacao-de-paineis-solares/ Sorocabano 32 (talk) 14:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Freedom of Panorama for 2D artwork in Japan. 茅野ふたば (talk) 14:47, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


There is no Freedom of Panorama for 2D artwork in Japan.

茅野ふたば (talk) 14:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


There is no Freedom of Panorama for 2D artwork in Japan.

茅野ふたば (talk) 14:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


valndal contribution. not in use since now guess why Bilderling (talk) 14:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The same uploader previously uploaded a copyrighted picture (see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mikimatsubara.jpg so we need proofs. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 15:09, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I'd like to delete those two files for the following reasons: when I first uploaded them, I thought it was an magazine about Brazil, published in the US. But now, while looking at the US copyright records on the Internet Archive, I've found that it was indeed published in Brazil, so the local laws (PD-BR-URAAwriter or PD-Brazil-media) must take precedence for each article. If the community agrees, I think that this would be the case of waiting to PD-old-assumed (2041 for Vol. 4/5 and 2045 for Vol. 12). I also would like to request for the admin to delete their respective pages on the Wikisource, if possible. My source.

Thanks,


Erick Soares3 (talk) 15:19, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Erick Soares3: I have removed your deletion requests on Wikisource. While these magazines may be copyrighted in Brazil, they are not copyrighted in the United States. Thus, they can be hosted at the English Wikisource (which is only concerned with U.S. copyright) even if they cannot be hosted on Wikimedia Commons (which sometimes cares about other countries’ laws). (You can also transcribe them freely on English Wikisource, if you are still so inclined.) TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 17:26, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @TE(æ)A,ea.: , I'm inclined to transcribe two short stories from those magazines, but I was going to check first if the translations are in public domain here in Brazil (but, if I understand you right, it isn't so necessary for the English Ws). Personally, I'm ok with deleting the magazines from Commons and hosting everything in WS untill the 2040s. Erick Soares3 (talk) 20:51, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Fake flag. Fry1989 eh? 15:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope Lotje (talk) 15:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Mauvaise qualité de la photo Abiba Pauline (talk) 15:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Mauvaise qualité de photo et angle inapproprié. L’image ne reflète pas l’idée qu’on veut véhiculer Abiba Pauline (talk) 15:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Mauvaise qualité de photo Abiba Pauline (talk) 15:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Fake bondage PSantos2241 (talk) 16:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Fake bondage PSantos2241 (talk) 16:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Unused very low quality photo of comet for which there are already numerous better alternatives on Commons. P 1 9 9   16:04, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by GermanV1981 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused text tables, should be in wiki-table format if needed, out of scope.

P 1 9 9   16:12, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by InSameer (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Copied from X/Twitter. No evidence that the GODL applies.

Yann (talk) 16:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Gadir as Copyvio (db-copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: help=off PD-textlogo, but may be out of scope. Yann (talk) 16:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This logo is copyrighted. We don't have permission to keep it. Also not encyclopedic. Best, Gadir (talk) 18:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Christian Lamb (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Commons:Derivative works from advertisement and toys.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:25, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:26, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by BQUB22-Huapaya (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagrams. Seems to be replaced with newer versions.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:29, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Cronygroupbd123 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused advertisement.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:36, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by EliLoSe (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused advertisement.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Out of scope, logo of a non notable company Atomicdragon136 (talk) 16:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Out of scope, logo of a non notable company Atomicdragon136 (talk) 16:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Uploads by CystalPalace

[edit]

Likely copyvio, these are scans of newspapers and magazines from 1991 --Atomicdragon136 (talk) 16:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly out of scope. If relevant, it is a QR code that goes to wikipedia.org Atomicdragon136 (talk) 16:46, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw this nomination as this image can be used to demonstrate the capability of AI image generation to generate a usable QR code, although the specific model isn't disclosed. Atomicdragon136 (talk) 16:25, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Out of scope AI generated artwork Atomicdragon136 (talk) 16:48, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Copyright infringement of State of Ceara https://sites.seinfra.ce.gov.br/vltaeroporto/index.html https://www.seinfra.ce.gov.br/ Sorocabano 32 (talk) 17:10, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement of ArchDaily/Pedro Mascaro https://www.archdaily.com.br/br/954062/metro-de-fortaleza-ramal-parangaba-mucuripe-fernandes-arquitetos-associados Sorocabano 32 (talk) 17:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement of State of Ceara https://sites.seinfra.ce.gov.br/linhaleste/index.html ///https://www.seinfra.ce.gov.br/ Sorocabano 32 (talk) 17:15, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement of State of Ceara https://sites.seinfra.ce.gov.br/linhaleste/index.html https://www.seinfra.ce.gov.br/ Sorocabano 32 (talk) 17:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fake traffic sign not in the Jordanian manual. Fry1989 eh? 17:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement of Archdaily/Pedro Mascaro https://www.archdaily.com.br/br/954062/metro-de-fortaleza-ramal-parangaba-mucuripe-fernandes-arquitetos-associados Sorocabano 32 (talk) 17:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fake traffic sign not in the MUTCDC. Fry1989 eh? 17:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fake traffic sign not in the MUTCDC. Fry1989 eh? 17:18, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement of Archdaily/Pedro Mascaro https://www.archdaily.com.br/br/954062/metro-de-fortaleza-ramal-parangaba-mucuripe-fernandes-arquitetos-associados Sorocabano 32 (talk) 17:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement of State of Ceará https://www.ceara.gov.br/2022/01/05/porto-do-pecem-bate-recorde-e-fecha-2021-com-mais-de-22-milhoes-de-toneladas-movimentadas/ Sorocabano 32 (talk) 17:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement of Archdaily/Pedro Mascaro https://www.archdaily.com.br/br/954062/metro-de-fortaleza-ramal-parangaba-mucuripe-fernandes-arquitetos-associados Sorocabano 32 (talk) 17:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright infringement of State of Ceara https://www.metrofor.ce.gov.br/2021/05/21/estacao-boulevard-do-arco-sera-reaberta-na-segunda-feira-24-5-com-novos-acessos-para-os-passageiros/ Sorocabano 32 (talk) 17:26, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

cannot be a selfie as is claimed, nu author given no metadata no permission Hoyanova (talk) 17:46, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could be with a self-timer, it's just probably not. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source page says it's public domain, but I think this is the same image that has been deleted twice before: Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Kosminski.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Aaron Kosminski.jpg. DrKay (talk) 17:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Go to the link, the article that it was taken from relays that it’s in the public domain. The man passed away in 1919, so it‘s automatically in the public domain in the US if it was published before 1929. I was reading the article, noticed the photo they used was in the public domain, realised that the Wikipedia article didn’t have a picture, and added it to Wikimedia Commons. Milashemelai (talk) 13:28, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, "The source page says it's public domain" right at the start, I've obviously already done that. The question is whether we can take the source page's claim of public domain at face value or whether we have to consider the claim here and here that it is a modern file not from Kosminski's lifetime and that the source page has stolen it from somewhere else. DrKay (talk) 15:32, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No source, incorrect spelling, other existing larger & more detailed versions William C. Minor (talk) 18:12, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 18:13, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Rajesh89srivastava (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 18:13, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Yongshunn (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 18:13, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Per COM:PACKAGING. Günther Frager (talk) 18:23, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

poor quality, blurry, there are much better pictures of British police officers around. Examples in the main Category:Police officers of the United Kingdom by service איז「Ysa」For love letters and other notes 18:23, 28 November 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.

Not own work. Uploader is permanently blocked for uploading copyvios. In my opinion the logo surpasses threshold of originality. Deletion request is created only because the file has been in Commons for 7 years and it is widely used. Taivo (talk) 16:05, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: we have various files with the exact same shape that we do consider free, see e.g. Category:Rebel Alliance. --Jcb (talk) 22:05, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Above COM:TOO USA ?? My opinion this logo is not a geometry simple,it's a symbol of a bird (phoenix) (google translator). AbchyZa22 (talk) 18:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should be OK to  Keep per the examples at COM:TOO US, I think. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:53, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek:But I see that the symbol is a phoenix not a geometry (google translator) AbchyZa22 (talk) 19:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, but we have an entire category of these, and it's really not obvious that it's a phoenix. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Glrx: Question any opinion?? (Google translator) AbchyZa22 (talk) 20:33, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by 田該邊 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

taken from internet:

  1. https://ent.ltn.com.tw/news/breakingnews/4092636
  2. https://gamforce.com/2022/promoter.html 2022 webpage has version without background. predates commons upload.

RoyZuo (talk) 18:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: plain text; license statement? You can place this information on your user page if you like, although it's largely redundant to the license field on files you upload. Omphalographer (talk) 19:12, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Zach Dir'Kamal (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope: fictitious flags and emblems.

Omphalographer (talk) 19:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Out of scope: nonsense AI-generated image of a (fictitious) card game. Omphalographer (talk) 19:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Out of scope: unused (outside a likely hoax sandbox) AI-generated image of a pink shotgun firing a rainbow. Omphalographer (talk) 19:22, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


forme pas bonne + extension de fichier FL00 80 (talk) 19:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Yemenu (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unknown com:ev, might also be com:dw of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuK7AdNd--k .

RoyZuo (talk) 19:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this has any educational value: it seems like a self-published memoir by someone non-notable. —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Small and pixelated; have File:Acridine oxidation by oxone, standardized.png as replacement DMacks (talk) 20:12, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's no evidence this is in the public domain in its source country, the US. There's no creation date, no date of publication, nothing to indicate it was published before 1929, or published without a copyright notice or without a renewal in the proper time periods. Prosfilaes (talk) 20:53, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Own work? 186.174.177.18 21:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's likely to be a 15 March 1992 snapshot by the uploader, especially since the user says on User:Krapto that they "Worked in sports magazines." I don't know enough to give an opinion about whether it's in scope, and it needs categorization and probably a bit more description, but I'd tend to give a former sports reporter/editor/whatever the benefit of the doubt on that and  Keep it if they don't come here to clarify. They've contributed on only 9 days so far, with the last being 27 August 2024, so I don't think it's very likely that they'll comment in this thread. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:37, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Oblack S (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope/nonsense and copyvios

Юрий Д.К 21:27, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Obviously not own work, also nominating File:BTS Image – Some Kind of Heaven.jpg for same reason. Traumnovelle (talk) 21:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope, aside from being used on the uploader's own test page Atomicdragon136 (talk) 21:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The Aladin album is definitively not de minimis, it is the main focus of the image. Günther Frager (talk) 21:54, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment I beleive that it does qualify as the art itself isn't the focus(though it does admittedly take up a lot of the frame), the signage and furtiture around it is the main thing depicted. I'm going to recuse myself from voting as it's my own image, but if the consensus is to delete then I'll upload a censored version. Dmartin969 (talk) 01:19, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Delete Yeah, I have to disagree. I think blurring is needed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:40, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Although Turkey has freedom of panorama it is only for works located in public streets, avenues or squares. This photo was taken instead a amusement park. Günther Frager (talk) 21:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP in Philippines; no exact date for this sculpture but it's clearly a recent work.

Omphalographer (talk) 22:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Low quality JPG version of file now available here. Elshad (talk) 22:09, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Maticsandi (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope: unused QR codes containing meaningless personal content.

Omphalographer (talk) 22:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]


This file was initially tagged by Ramachandra Rrr as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: F1|1=File:Sheshashayi - Laxminarayan by DHURANDHAR MV.jpg|2=Claimed as own work, and no source founded in file,uploaded by sock user}} .Ramachandra Rrr'. Ramachandra Rrr (talk) Ramachandra Rrr (talk)

Not claimed as an own work, should be discussed since it's in use by some Wikipedias. Painting appears to be PD in India but restored by URAA since author died in 1944 which is not before 1941. Abzeronow (talk) 22:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Nutshinou as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: F10 (personal photos by non-contributors). He looks, however, experienced enough to collage a well designed user page, so that I assume that he contributes under another user name. NearEMPTiness (talk) 22:48, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete: No. Run-of-the-mill unused personal file by non-contributor uploaded for spam purposes. An experienced editor would know to use en:Template:Infobox Wikipedia user or en:Template:Infobox (depending on whether or not this was trying to be an article) especially after fiddling it for 6 years. This mess of a userpage was generated mostly by Wikipedia's Visual Editor and is not well designed for the aforementioned reason, additionally, it is eligible for en:WP:U5. Nutshinou Talk! 23:06, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete Also, an unlikely selfie. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete A user with 10 edits in total and all of them in its user page is definitively F10. Günther Frager (talk) 17:56, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probable copyvio, certainly not "own work" from 2022. Image subject died in 2010. 2003:C0:8F21:AD00:D0BB:2AB2:1D06:3C55 22:57, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Misrecognised Alexander as Chandragupta, file originally copied from File:Coin of Alexander I Balas, Antioch mint.jpg NXcrypto (talk) 22:58, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possible violation of the copyright, the creator Willem van de Poll only died on December 10, 1970, so the period of 70 years after the death of the author, which is necessary in German-speaking countries, did not expire until December 10, 2040. Lutheraner (talk) 22:58, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Per en:Willem van de Poll#Van de Poll Archive, many of his photos were donated to the Dutch National Archive (Nationaal Archief). The Archive says they own the copyright (Auteursrechthebbende: Nationaal Archief, CC0), and apparently they have released the file under CC0. de:Willem van de Poll#Archiv explicitly says that the Nationaal Archief also purchased the copyrights, as does nl:Willem van de Poll#Archief.
@Lutheraner: Copyright terms in the Netherlands, Germany and almost every other country run to the end of the year, so van de Poll's works will enter the public domain on January 1, 2041. --Rosenzweig τ 07:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep No violation of copyright at all. There are well over 30,000 photographs by Willem van de Poll uploaded to Commons, and they are heavily used (>5,000 times) in most language versions of Wikipedia. Yes, GENERAL copyright terms in the Netherlands end 70 years after the death of an author (Art. 37 of the Dutch copyright Act). But if copyright is transferred, the new owner decides about the terms. That's why more than 2 million photographs held in Dutch organisations like Rijksdienst Cultureel Erfgoed, press agency ANEFO and several museums and archives were uploaded to Commons in line with the given license. In the case of Willem van de Pol the Dutch National Archives are holder of the copyright of the photos. They released the photographs CC-zero, and correctly documented this. Vysotsky (talk) 11:26, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unable to verify license without proper source. Absolutiva (talk) 23:48, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]