Commons:Deletion requests/2023/11/13

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
12 November 2023
14 November 2023
Deletion requests on 13 November 2023

November 13[edit]

File:Philippe starck, sedia mister bliss, 1982.JPG[edit]

This file was initially tagged by HombreDHojalata as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: (c) Philippe Starck. Commons:Derivative works. Should be discussed with respect to COM:UTIL; being displayed in a museum does not automatically mean it is not utilitarian. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:39, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have uploaded these images because in my view they fall under Commons:Ua: therefore they look like pieces of art (so they were into museums), they are utilitarian objects anyone can normally buy in shops. --Sailko (talk) 06:48, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Philippe starck per alessi spa., bollitore hot bertaa, 1990.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by HombreDHojalata as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: (c) Philippe Starck. Commons:Derivative works. Should be discussed with respect to COM:UTIL; being displayed in a museum does not automatically mean it is not utilitarian. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:39, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have uploaded these images because in my view they fall under Commons:Ua: therefore they look like pieces of art (so they were into museums), they are utilitarian objects anyone can normally buy in shops. --Sailko (talk) 06:48, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Philippe starck per alessi spa., colino max le chinois, 1990.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by HombreDHojalata as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: (c) Philippe Starck. Commons:Derivative works. Should be discussed with respect to COM:UTIL; being displayed in a museum does not automatically mean it is not utilitarian. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:39, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have uploaded these images because in my view they fall under Commons:Ua: therefore they look like pieces of art (so they were into museums), they are utilitarian objects anyone can normally buy in shops. --Sailko (talk) 06:49, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Philippe starck per alessi spa., centrotavola les ministres, 1996, in reina e acciaio.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by HombreDHojalata as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: (c) Philippe Starck. Commons:Derivative works. Should be discussed with respect to COM:UTIL; being displayed in a museum does not automatically mean it is not utilitarian. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:39, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have uploaded these images because in my view they fall under Commons:Ua: therefore they look like pieces of art (so they were into museums), they are utilitarian objects anyone can normally buy in shops. --Sailko (talk) 06:49, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:En-uk-autism.ogg[edit]

I remember making this file back when I thought that, with enough practice and experience, I could pronounce words not in my native accent or language. Instead, I am convinced that I was motivated by intellectual hubris. Although my spree of such uploads spans several years before this one, this file was literally by someone then in his early twenties (yes, in his early twenties, not a teenager as insinuated on Wiktionary) who, cognizant of at least months of experience in this language on Duolingo, believed with a straight face that he could enunciate Japanese words with great accuracy and record them, and now it disgusts me that this file continues to be used across several Wikimedia projects. I am dismayed that no Briton has objected to this recording. What collateral damage I may have wrought. I suggest this file be deleted, untying my name from this file and making leeway for a real Briton to make the recording. And yes, I want my name fully untied, and I do not want this file simply replaced with a new upload and stored in the file history. For that matter, I would also like to see all my Japanese recordings disappear, for what jackass, with a mindset like mine, thinks it prudent for their own files to be used as trustworthy pronunciation guides? Do I need to flag those files for deletion as well? I have made an ape out of myself, especially in the past, occasionally making one howler after another. I am trying to rectify that with intellectualism and experience. FreeMediaKid$ 03:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:The Co-op Group.jpg[edit]

Metadata credits Rob Gray/DiGiTaLPiC, not the organization that own the Flickr account. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 03:40, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Template:Mil.gov.ua Twitter[edit]

Not a real license. The author could not provide evidence that anywhere is claimed that the content from this Twitter account is distributed under a free license. See: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Appsoft4 . I wait more that 1 week, but user didn't gave me an answer. Kursant504 (talk) 04:46, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also see: here no one has provided any evidence that content from social pages can be considered free:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Copyright/Archive/2023/11#Media_published_by_press_services_of_Ukrainian_military Kursant504 (talk) 05:00, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Stephy 1 (low).jpg[edit]

Appears to be a studio portrait, plus it was the user's only uploads, dubious claim of own work A1Cafel (talk) 05:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Stephy 1 (low) (cropped).jpg[edit]

Appears to be a studio portrait, plus it was the initial user's only uploads, dubious claim of own work A1Cafel (talk) 05:49, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Vlag van NMLimburg.png[edit]

This flag is nonexistent, it's not the flag of the region itself Regio Noord en Midden Limburg doesn't exist, because I can't find it, not own work, so it is probably original research. Alexphangia Talk 06:25, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Castellointerno.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by ZioNicco as no source (No source since) Krd 06:52, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

without source and author, there is no evidence that it was taken over 20 years ago ZioNicco (talk) 08:38, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Castelloterrazza.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by ZioNicco as no source (No source since) Krd 06:52, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

without source and author, there is no evidence that it was taken over 20 years ago ZioNicco (talk) 08:39, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:絵心経きんちゃく 01.jpg[edit]

Possibly copyright violation; This image may be considered a photographic reproduction of an artwork controlled by Kyoto Kurochiku[1]. Nux-vomica 1007 (talk) 07:23, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:絵心経きんちゃく 02.jpg[edit]

Possibly copyright violation; This image may be considered a photographic reproduction of an artwork controlled by Kyoto Kurochiku[2]. Nux-vomica 1007 (talk) 07:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ali Yazdani - Tennis player.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this licens King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:41, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ali Khatami.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this licens King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:42, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[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.

File:Algeria 2021 FIFA Arab Cup champions.jpg[edit]

حقوق الصورة احمد سامي (talk) 15:59, 23 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Gbawden (talk) 07:01, 3 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Algeria 2021 FIFA Arab Cup champions.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:42, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[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.

File:Ahmad.jpg[edit]

Out of scope; no explanation of who this is or why a picture of them might be educational Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:19, 12 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9  ✉ 18:53, 19 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ahmad.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ahad Sheykhlari 139809171729222419076114.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:51, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Keep. This is a misconception that every single uncredited photo from Tasnim is necessarily copyvio, as there are several documented cases of exception to the presumption by the nominator (please see User:HeminKurdistan/Tasnim for more information). Speaking of this particular photograph, one could say from the clues that this was created by Tasnim staff. It is explicitly mentioned in the source that the report was done by the office of Tasnim News Agency in the city of Tabriz (where the photo was taken). It is worth menioning that photographs taken by reporters from Tasnim provincial offices are not always like the photos created by its Photography Service, sometimes lacking the name of the photographer and/or typical watermark. A red microphone with Tasnim logo is visible in the uncropped version of the image, indicating that Tasnim had presence in the press conference. So, it can be assumed that the license applies to this file. HeminKurdistan (talk) 19:38, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Amin.zendegani 02.jpg[edit]

all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license {{User|POS78}} talk 07:53, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files in Category:Abdolmalek Rigi[edit]

Tagged for speedy deletion by POS78, contested by HeminKurdistan. Should be discussed.

King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:55, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Keep Thank you for nominating these files for deletion and removing the speedy deletion template. The source gallery says that these photos are published exclusively by Tasnim News, and all content by Tasnim News is freely licensed per the footer. Further, the photos are watermarked by Tasnim and higher-resolution or non-watermarked versions are not available. Streamline8988 (talk) 06:12, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Amir Hatami and Hossein Dehghan 01.jpg[edit]

all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license {{User|POS78}} talk 07:57, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Amir Hatami03.jpg[edit]

all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license {{User|POS78}} talk 07:57, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Amir Hatami and Mohammad Bagheri 01.jpg[edit]

all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license

{{User|POS78}} talk 07:58, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Amir Hatami 03.jpg[edit]

all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license {{User|POS78}} talk 08:03, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Amir Hatami 02.jpg[edit]

all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license {{User|POS78}} talk 08:03, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ebeg, Kesenian Tari Tradisional.jpg[edit]

The image was grabbed from Facebook (FBMD).The source must be provided to verify its copyright status. 0x0a (talk) 08:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Amir Hatami 01.jpg[edit]

all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license

{{User|POS78}} talk 08:08, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Abdollah Araghi.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:17, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:8-Didare Rabari Ba Basijian.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:18, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:7-(Meeting of the Supreme Leader of the Revolution with the poets and reciters of Ahl al-Bayt)-دیدار رهبر معظم انقلاب با مداحان و شاعران اهل‌ بیت‌ (ع).jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:20, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[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.

File:7-Didare Rabari Ba Basijian.jpg[edit]

File obtained from Leader.ir, which is not freely-licensed HeminKurdistan (talk) 16:36, 1 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:42, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:7-Didare Rabari Ba Basijian.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:20, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:6-(Meeting of the Supreme Leader of the Revolution with the poets and reciters of Ahl al-Bayt)-دیدار رهبر معظم انقلاب با مداحان و شاعران اهل‌ بیت‌ (ع).jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:21, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:In Plenty and In Time of Need instrumental.ogg[edit]

Not a creation of the US Navy, likely still in copyright — Racconish 💬 08:24, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:3-(Meeting of the Supreme Leader of the Revolution with the poets and reciters of Ahl al-Bayt)-دیدار رهبر معظم انقلاب با مداحان و شاعران اهل‌ بیت‌ (ع).jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:26, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[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.

File:3-Didare Rabari Ba Basijian.jpg[edit]

File obtained from Leader.ir, which is not freely-licensed HeminKurdistan (talk) 16:36, 1 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:42, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:3-Didare Rabari Ba Basijian.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:26, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear @King of Hearts, nomination for this file (along with File:7-Didare Rabari Ba Basijian.jpg, File:6-Didare Rabari Ba Basijian.jpg and File:4-Didare Rabari Ba Basijian.jpg) was closed by User:Yann as delete, so please consider deleting this file without repeating the procedure (Please note that other files in this set are nominated for the first time and they are not subject to what I said). Thank you. HeminKurdistan (talk) 21:08, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:28-Thunder rocket-موشک‌ رعد.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:27, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:29-Thunder missile system-سامانه موشکی رعد.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:27, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:28-(Provincial trips of the president)-سفرهای استانی رئیس جمهور- خوزستان.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:27, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Aqa Najafi Quchani.jpg[edit]

all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license {{User|POS78}} talk 08:29, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2-Didare Rabari Ba Basijian.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2-(Meeting of the Supreme Leader of the Revolution with the poets and reciters of Ahl al-Bayt)-دیدار رهبر معظم انقلاب با مداحان و شاعران اهل‌ بیت‌ (ع).jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:35-ستاد اجرایی فرمان امام- کمک امدادی.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:33, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:99پیاده روی کربلا.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:33, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Abdorreza Seyf.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:34, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:14010125000464 Test NewPhotoFree.png[edit]

This file was initially tagged by POS78 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: all images without explicitly watermarked attribution to agency photographers are presumed to be outside this license King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:34, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Yakovlev SJ-100 Logo.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Jo-Jo Eumerus as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: None of these are an own work. Uploader indicates that it was self-photographed, COM:AGF on that. Regarding the logo, does it meet COM:TOO? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hard to say, given Commons:Threshold of originality#Russia says we don't have precedents for simple logos. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:41, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:6B5B12BB-F098-4872-B06Ft-1FF709411916.jpg[edit]

cette personne n'est pas connu et je préfère qu'elle soit supprimer car je regrette de l'avoir poster Tanoudb (talk) 09:38, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ameergfx.jpg[edit]

Possible copyvio: Logo of a company CoffeeEngineer (talk) 09:58, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Luca Moser.jpg[edit]

copyvio, uploader is not the same person like the photographer, copyright holder Alabasterstein (talk) 10:21, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Howe Haus, Hotel Astor (KiIel) (53328772201).jpg[edit]

typo file title RStehn (talk) 10:24, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply] 

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghurba (talk • contribs) 13:39, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Faisal and Abdul Sattar Edhi, 20 March 2016.jpg[edit]

1) duplicate / already on wiki commons 2) colours do not correspond with the original Ghurba (talk) 13:39, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Own work but when uploading the colours keep changing to pitch black. This work was previously uploaded on 14 August 2023 with a water mark. This photo was meant to be a technically improved version to replace it but it is not. Hence I request deletion. Ghurba (talk) 13:47, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:مراحل تطور حمامات حلوان (كبريتاج حلوان).jpg[edit]

Possibly copyvio. As source is a link to Pinterest, but the link is not directing to this picture. Older photos in collage may be copyright-free, but there is also newer ones, which are not likely to be own work. Velma (talk) 11:20, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pliego de cordel. Taller Cristóbal Miró.png[edit]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Pliego_de_cordel._Taller_Crist%C3%B3bal_Mir%C3%B3.png SiruRedkampus (talk) 11:29, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SiruRedkampus: Please write an actual reason why you are requesting deletion. Just linking a file is not enough. --Rosenzweig τ 11:36, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The author asked to remove the picture SiruRedkampus (talk) 09:11, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Causa contra Pascuala Calonge, José Díez Moreno y Juana Yubero. Archivo Histórico Provincial de Burgos.png[edit]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/Causa_contra_Pascuala_Calonge%2C_Jos%C3%A9_D%C3%ADez_Moreno_y_Juana_Yubero._Archivo_Hist%C3%B3rico_Provincial_de_Burgos.png SiruRedkampus (talk) 11:29, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SiruRedkampus: Please write an actual reason why you are requesting deletion. Just linking a file is not enough. --Rosenzweig τ 11:36, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The author asked to remove the picture SiruRedkampus (talk) 09:11, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ermita de Nuestra Señora de la Soledad.png[edit]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/Ermita_de_Nuestra_Se%C3%B1ora_de_la_Soledad.png SiruRedkampus (talk) 11:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/Ermita_de_Nuestra_Se%C3%B1ora_de_la_Soledad.png SiruRedkampus (talk) 11:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SiruRedkampus: Please write an actual reason why you are requesting deletion. Just linking a file is not enough. --Rosenzweig τ 11:35, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The author asked to remove the picture SiruRedkampus (talk) 09:12, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pliego de cordel. Imprenta de Estivill.png[edit]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/Pliego_de_cordel._Imprenta_de_Estivill.png SiruRedkampus (talk) 11:32, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SiruRedkampus: Please write an actual reason why you are requesting deletion. Just linking a file is not enough. --Rosenzweig τ 11:36, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The author asked to remove the picture SiruRedkampus (talk) 09:11, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:AFSK1200.wav[edit]

Author requests deletion HamRadioOperator73 (talk) 11:49, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Headquaters der IBS Paper Performance Group.jpg[edit]

possible copyvio (c) HARRER_CHRISTIAN M2k~dewiki (talk) 12:25, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hallo,
bei diesem Bild handelt es sich um ein von mir (HARRER_CHRISTIAN) erstelltes Werk, ich bin für die Firma IBS Paper Performance Group tätig und habe meine eigene Ausrüstung für die Anfertigung dieses Bildes verwendet. IBS Paper Performance Group (talk) 07:20, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Yeouido 13.jpg[edit]

Same case as Commons:Deletion requests/File:Yeouido 2.jpg. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


 Comment I think this case is different. I think view of Yeouido Park is main object. Ox1997cow (talk) 12:32, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ox1997cow I don't immediately see the park as the first thing that you will see, but rather the building complex itself. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 22:08, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files in Category:Deng Xiaoping billboard in Lizhi Park[edit]

Same this case. There is no freedom of panorama for 2D works in China.

Ox1997cow (talk) 13:04, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This law applies in China, where Wikipedia is blocked anyway; the Wikimedia Foundation is headquartered in San Francisco. Besides, the conversation quoted above does not seem to clearly conclude that this type of images would infringe Chinese laws. Ydecreux (talk) 13:39, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please read this discussion. Ox1997cow (talk) 14:00, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think this billboard is a copy right artwork. It was created to be viewed by the public directly or indirectly. It is in public domain. For File:Deng Xiaoping billboard in Lizhi Park, Shenzhen.jpg Keep， the main object is the building behind the billboard. EditQ (talk) 06:59, 17 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:20190911 kasalla 814-2000x1333 (2).jpg[edit]

copyvio, no permission of the copyright holder visible, see an other version here: https://www.ksta.de/koeln/kasalla-interview-ein-grosser-teil-der-koelner-wird-so-was-von-unfassbar-eskalieren-180169 Alabasterstein (talk) 13:44, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Cartões de visita de diferentes materiais e técnicas.png[edit]

O arquivo constitui uma violação dos direitos de autor porque os direitos estão protegidos e a obra não foi publicada com uma licença livre. wikiseelie (talk) 13:57, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Kyrylo Nesterenko photo.jpg[edit]

Image appears to have been previously published at https://pflk.kz/rus/clubs/2/management_id/1144. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 14:05, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:David Cameron Opens the new City of Liverpool Conservatives Office 7th January 2010.jpg[edit]

Photo By Andrew Parsons per Metadata, also mentioned no commercial use A1Cafel (talk) 14:13, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[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 Mayanicaragua (talk · contribs)[edit]

All of these images are claimed to be own work, but given the uploader's history of copyright violations, this claim is rather dubious. File:Tifa 2019.jpg has been copied from Facebook. There are several logos from different beauty pageant for which they claim to be the copyright holder. The earliest 3 logos appear to be their own work, but these are jut fan made logos and are not appropriate for any actual educational use. The EXIF for File:Vene2020.jpg indicates it was "created by photogrid" which is an online collage maker.

Whpq (talk) 14:04, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Materialscientist (talk) 00:51, 31 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by Mayanicaragua (talk · contribs)[edit]

These two images are identified as "own work", and are likely fan created logos which are not appropriate for use in any encyclopedia article as they are misleading readers into thinking they are legitimate logos. The Miss Universe Nicaragua logo also looks like it incorporates a silhouette figure in the image but doe snot identify the source for this. That logo is in use on a couple Miss Nicaragua pages (EN and ES), and a look at the Miss Nicaragua web site does not show any use of such an image that I am able to find. See also previous deletion discussion for this user's uploads, Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Mayanicaragua.

Whpq (talk) 14:23, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Museu da Casa Brasileira.png[edit]

O arquivo constitui uma violação de direito autoral(VDA) porque os direitos estão protegidos e a obra não foi publicada com uma licença livre wikiseelie (talk) 14:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:32S 34S isotope fractionation in plant sulphur.pdf[edit]

Large white margins need to be trimmed. The original uploader has already do so, but uploaded it with a different file name (File:32S-34S isotope fractionation in plant sulphur.pdf). This inferior version is therefore not needed and should be deleted. Marbletan (talk) 14:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[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.

File:Roronoa Zoro.jpg[edit]

Roronoa Zoro is a character from the non free anime One Piece --Okki (talk) 09:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted. -mattbuck (Talk) 03:43, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Roronoa Zoro.jpg[edit]

This piece of fanart seems to resemble the canon art enough that COM:DW probably applies. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:50, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Musique à bouches au gala de l'ADISQ 2023.jpg[edit]

L'utilisateur ne détient pas les droits (a téléversé plusieurs photos du band créditées à différents photographes) Aqueduc (talk) 15:42, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[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.

File:Степан Степанович Шиловский.jpg[edit]

1) Явно подложная лицензия. Фотография 1860-1862 года никак не может быть собственной работой её загрузившего. 2) Ввиду неуказания источника никак нельзя установить факт того, что фотография находится в общественном достоянии. Jim Hokins (talk) 22:49, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Я не утверждала, что работа собственная. Это мой скан старой фотографии. В чём проблема? Вы что не видите, что это старая фотография? Действительно примерно 1860-1862 годов. Но скан мой. Забава Путятишна (talk) 01:17, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Так что нет никакой "подложной лицензии". Забава Путятишна (talk) 01:18, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Эту лицензию мне автоматически подсунула Википедия. Я исправила. Это скан старой фотографии. Забава Путятишна (talk) 01:25, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Источник: Архив Васильевых-Шиловских Забава Путятишна (talk) 01:46, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
И что теперь? Где дискуссии? Почему молчание? Вы пришли, написали что-то, отправили на удаление, вам ответили, всё предоставили. Что вас теперь не устраивает? Хотите можете обратиться к владельцу фотографии, который предоставил мне эту фотографию для сканирования и размещения в Википедии. Забава Путятишна (talk) 16:50, 22 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kept: corrected. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 12:00, 17 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Степан Степанович Шиловский.jpg[edit]

Because it is not in public domain, it is protected by copyright law Забава Путятишна (talk) 15:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •  Keep Image from Russian Empire, Soviet Russia has no claim to previous copyrights. --RAN (talk) 03:32, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    This photograph is in the private collection of S. Shilovsky’s descendants. The rescan was made by me from original scan taken by one of the descendants. Image added by me. A private photograph cannot be in any public domain. I want to remove it at the request of the copyright holders. Moreover, it is not used on any Wikipedia page. The copyright holders did not like the license, which was put forward not by me, but by one of the Wikimedia participants. For this reason, the photo is now on the site, where it is an object of commercial use.
    And I don’t understand what Soviet Russia and the ownership of this photograph have in common. Забава Путятишна (talk) 15:24, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Please stop adding all these licenses because they are unfair.
    This photograph, together with the owners of the photograph, was located on the territory of the Polish Republic in the city of Lublin, and not in the Russian Federation. No one made or posted this scan from the territory of the Russian Federation. Just as now, this photograph is not located on the territory of the Russian Federation. Therefore, the license you specified does not apply to this photo. Забава Путятишна (talk) 15:46, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Musique à bouches.jpg[edit]

Raison pour la demande de suppression : L'utilisateur ne détient pas les droits (a téléversé plusieurs photos du band créditées à différents photographes) Aqueduc (talk) 15:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Musique à bouches en spectacle (2).jpg[edit]

Raison pour la demande de suppression : L'utilisateur ne détient pas les droits (a téléversé plusieurs photos du band créditées à différents photographes) Aqueduc (talk) 15:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Naruto Mini Llavero.jpg[edit]

Commons:Toys Trade (talk) 15:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Musique à bouches au New Bedford Folk Festival.jpg[edit]

Raison pour la demande de suppression : L'utilisateur ne détient pas les droits (a téléversé plusieurs photos du band créditées à différents photographes) Aqueduc (talk) 15:44, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Arthur - book cover (53319922716).jpg[edit]

license washing Mateus2019 (talk) 15:49, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Love bike.jpg[edit]

purtroppo è firmato Luangiphoto (talk) 16:26, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Luangiphoto: If you want to have this file deleted, please remove it from Commons:Photo challenge/2023 - November - Bicycles first. --Rosenzweig τ 07:09, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

purtroppo è firmato Luangiphoto (talk) 07:25, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Cabinet Office logo.svg[edit]

Some of the other UK government department logos (for example, this one) which contain the same coat of arms drawing are fair use, and the file linked in the description of this file is not the same as the one actually in it. Xeroctic (talk) 16:37, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •  Keep it's very clearly PD-UKGov. The others from enwiki should be brought over here as well. Mike Peel (talk) 16:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Delete I see no evidence that this is public domain[3] and departmental logos and the Royal Arms are specifically exempted from OGL3.[4] Celia Homeford (talk) 09:33, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[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 LIMO 5 (talk · contribs)[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like https://www.flickr.com/photos/26714704@N08/3487400134/.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:53, 31 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by LIMO 5 (talk · contribs)[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:54, 31 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:24, 7 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[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 LIMO 5 (talk · contribs)[edit]

Appear to be Google Street View images

Ytoyoda (talk) 04:11, 1 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 09:09, 23 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by LIMO 5 (talk · contribs)[edit]

Too complex for PD-textlogo to apply

The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 17:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by LIMO 5 (talk · contribs)[edit]

Obvious false claims of own work / false CC licenses. Probably too complex for PD-textlogo to apply.

The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 17:13, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Logo w1 coc name.png[edit]

It might above COM:TOO in Thailand. Wutkh (talk) 17:28, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Photo 5949587272393409578 y-1.jpg[edit]

No clear justification is provided that the image can be used on Commons Hektor (talk) 17:31, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:محمد الصغير بوسحاقي.jpg[edit]

Not own works, looks like a photo of a photo Multichill (talk) 19:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files by IngridinDC[edit]

No Exif, some small files. Probable license laundering. --BadzilBot (talk) 19:16, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •  Delete – None of these files look like their own work. --Wow (talk) 05:05, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Schoolgirls in Dorking, London (6258299657).jpg[edit]

A cropped version of this image was previously nominated for deletion. The discussion there is relevant to my nomination but I'm nominating this image because it's the original - if this is in error I can nominate that page instead.

I believe this image should be deleted as per COM:NOCREEPSHOTS. While there has apparently been debate over whether not the image appears innocent (I for one believe it does not), the source page for the image on Flickr makes crystal clear that this image is a creepshot.

The photographer titles the photo "All Legs and Ladders". "Ladder" in this sense is British English usage, for those unaware it refers to a run or hole in nylon stockings. In the description he goes on to write that he "thought their long hair and legs were well worth a snap". An edit to the description adds "Well done girls and stay exactly where you are." The language makes clear the image was taken without their knowledge and uploaded because of the photographer's interest in the underage girls' bodies and school uniform. It is a creepshot. Thus, its provenance is irredeemably tainted, to use the wording of COM:DIGNITY.

As this caused some confusion previously I want to make the issue here clear. This is not about legality nor whether the subjects are identifiable. This is purely about COM:DIGNITY. As per the wording there, the subjects being unidentifiable and the photo being legal in the jurisdiction in which it was taken does not make an image automatically acceptable. We know from the image source that it is a creepshot which does not respect the human dignity of the subjects. Merely removing the original title from the description (as was done previously) does not fix that problem as the link to the source remains. There is in my opinion no need to keep this image, and many reasons to remove it. Cyllel (talk) 19:33, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •  Keep. Per COM:CREEP, scope must be weighed and the long-term good faith usage of the image means that the image remains within scope regardless of the fact that it is currently removed from articles. Beyond this, there is nothing prurient about the image itself (it is far different than the examples given at COM:CREEP). The only concerns were about the description, which was edited. I see there are additional concerns with linking to the prurient description on Flickr. I carefully examined the CC-BY-2.0 full text and a URI (in this case a URL) is required if practical. CC-BY-2.0 does not state, however, that this link must be to the image description page of Flickr. It can simply be linked to the work itself (in the present case this URL would qualify), so I will replace the problematic link on the image description page. IronGargoyle (talk) 19:59, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
While of course opinions on such things can differ, I totally disagree that there is nothing prurient about the image in itself. I originally found this image through Wikipedia, when it was in use over there. The moment I saw it I understood what it was, something which following the link to the Flickr page only made clearer. I would never have investigate the image to find the source if I hadn't been immediately shocked by its obvious inappropriate nature.
However, regardless of whether we agree about the image being obviously a creepshot based only on the image itself, any doubts are dispelled by reading the photographer's own description. Hiding that by changing the link doesn't change the fact that we now know what it is. The issue of human dignity doesn't go away if we hide the page. I'll try to put it as simply as possible: The issue here is not the photographer's words themselves are bad, it's that the words let us know that the image is bad. I'd argue hiding the full link in this way is worse, ethically speaking, than keeping it, as it is an admission that we know the provenance is inappropriate. Therefore I've reverted your change - my position is that either we decide that the image is not a creepshot, in which case linking to the photographer's full description is fine, or it is a creepshot, in which case it should be deleted completely. Cyllel (talk) 21:15, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've reverted your reinstatement of the inappropriate link. Please do not re-add this. It serves no purpose and is only being disruptive to try and prove a point. IronGargoyle (talk) 21:38, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's obvious there's a strong disagreement here and I won't get into an edit war about it. I genuinely do not understand the view that the image is made appropriate as long as we hide its origin as best we can within the letter of the CC license. In terms of my request for deletion, I want to make clear here that I do not believe hiding the link to the Flickr page in any way resolves the COM:CREEP concerns. Cyllel (talk) 22:39, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment Cyllel, i suggest you take a look at the other photos from this Flickr accpunt to ensure there isn't anymore problematic photos--Trade (talk) 02:22, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Honestly I've been avoiding looking as I was worried what I might find! There's certainly a few that look dodgy (if you'll excuse the Britishism) in the same way as this image. But maybe focusing on resolving the question with this image first before looking at others would be best? --Cyllel (talk) 20:59, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment Since the cropped version was kept, there's no good reason to delete this one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:50, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was unsure about the correct procedure for this as my intent is for the deletion of both to be discussed. Should I nominate the other too to make sure? Cyllel (talk) 20:33, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Doesnt matter. Either both gets deleted or both stays Trade (talk) 01:48, 15 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • First thing: They're the same image -- anything that would apply to one would apply to the other, and they should both be nominated together.
    Second thing: Per Commons:Deletion_requests#Appealing_decisions, renominating an image is a perfectly acceptable way to object to a past keep outcome after talking with the closing admin.
    IMO the case is about (1) to what extent are they identifiable thanks to the exact location being provided? (2) Regardless of whether they're identifiable, to what extent is the image itself similar to an upskirt/downblouse/creepshot, which doesn't require the subject to be identifiable? (3) Regardless of whether it looks like a "creepshot", the language of the photographer betrays that it is one. Even if we remove that language from Commons, we're required to link to it on Flickr. To what extent should knowledge of the provenance influence our determination of a tainted provenance, and to what extent should we consider language on the sites we link to in contextualizing an image?
    For me, I find this case to be 90% about #3. The fact that we know it's a creepshot, and link to that fact, means it should be deleted. Changing the description on Commons isn't good enough. As such, it should've been deleted at the first nomination. COM:SCOPE was irrelevant, as this is obviously not one of those very exceptional cases when the analogy to how quality newspapers may apply a "public interest" test to doubtful images -- that's not supposed to apply to absolutely anything that one person happened to add to a Wikipedia page.
    Now, since I wrote the rationale above, IronGargoyle replaced the link to Flickr with a direct link to the image. That avoids linking to the description that makes clear the photographer is a creep. Does it satisfy the requirements for linking to the original source? I'm not sure. While the change to the link resolves part of my objection, we're still left with an image that we know is a creepshot.
    I'm not going to !vote delete, but I'll leave a big frownie face here to express disappointment in everyone working so hard to ensure we retain a low quality creepshot of schoolgirls: :(   — Rhododendrites talk |  13:34, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not sure why you would bring up Commons:Deletion requests#Appealing decisions because I haven't objected to the nomination procedurally in this forum. I discouraged renomination on my talk page because in my opinion I felt like the proposal to renominate didn't bring forward new information/arguments beyond the fact that it was no longer used, to which I elaborated on removal of user not necessarily removing scope (and it is recommended that a renomination of a past keep outcome should have new information/arguments, per deletion policy). It seemed to me that Cyllel simply did not like the outcome of the original deletion request. The last part of this comment also feels like casting aspersions, which is not appreciated. IronGargoyle (talk) 16:05, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I haven't objected to the nomination - Right, it was a response to Since the cropped version was kept... (in case the implication was that this wasn't an acceptable way to challenge the previous outcome) — Rhododendrites talk |  16:29, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Our discussion on your talk page did clarify for me that the image being no longer in use doesn't necessarily constitute removing scope, thanks for that, although the relevance of COM:SCOPE itself does appear to be in question per Rhododendrites above. I'm also sorry for being a bit bold and going ahead and adding this nomination without fully discussing my reasoning with you first as I came to understand the situation a bit more. Obviously I personally did not agree with the outcome of the original request, as my belief was, and is, that it should be deleted. But specifically I claim that this argument: We know that the image is a creepshot, and removing/hiding the link to the source does not resolve this issue has not at all been resolved by previous discussions. I also do not think that this argument has been resolved here either. Cyllel (talk) 20:54, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Delete the intent is to be a creepshot, of underage girls, and it’s pretty clear what it is just by looking at it (mediocre quality, heavy zoom, weird high angle from some weirdo photo sniper nest, subjects who are clearly both unaware they’re being photographed and in a quiet suburban area where they would not reasonably expect to be photographed) never mind the extremely icky commentary accompanying the image. It’s not even in meaningful use. Screw this image. Dronebogus (talk) 03:05, 19 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by Achilles075 (talk · contribs)[edit]

User seems to be uploading web photos, unsure if these are the uploader's work.

Adeletron 3030 (talk) 21:11, 30 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by Achilles075 (talk · contribs)[edit]

Another upload from a single-purpose account with a history of copyvios. This one is a PNG, so likely a screenshot of another photo or video.

Adeletron 3030 (talk) 19:40, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Friedrich Wilhelm Möller - Portrait mit Gitarre.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Yann as no license (No license since). 1949 photograph, the author appears to be unknown (Wolfgang Wicklein wrote the article it appears). Could be public domain in Germany but not the US. Abzeronow (talk) 19:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Dipl. inž. arh. Milica Šterić i Rodoljub Bakić na svečanom okupljanju Energoprojekta.jpg[edit]

Not in public domain, published in 1990, and copied from a copyrighted web site. Ђидо (talk) 19:53, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The website doesn't have ownership over the photo. This was in Energoprojekt archives and was used in their brochure which was passed on to their workers in the 1990s. VojinDaut (talk) 20:19, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If photo was first published in 1990s (even in internal corporate brochure), it is still under copyright according to Yugoslav/Serbian laws. Ђидо (talk) 08:57, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Dipl. inž. arh. Milica Šterić na svečanom okupljanju Energoprojekta.jpg[edit]

Not in public domain, published in 1990, and copied from a copyrighted web site. Ђидо (talk) 19:54, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The website doesn't have ownership over the photo. This was in Energoprojekt archives and was used in their brochure which was passed on to their workers in the 1960s. VojinDaut (talk) 20:18, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is it 1990s or 1960s? Because this photo is obvious derivative (crop/desaturation) from File:Dipl. inž. arh. Milica Šterić i Rodoljub Bakić na svečanom okupljanju Energoprojekta.jpg, where you claim it is from 1990s. Does not seem that photo is from 1960's as Mrs. Šterić seems considerably older. Ђидо (talk) 09:00, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Milica Šterić - SAS catalogue “Nagrada arhitekture Srbije” 1984.jpg[edit]

Not in public domain, published in 1984, and copied from a copyrighted web site. Ђидо (talk) 19:58, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, the photo is from SAS's catalogue originally, it is not in ownership of the copyrighted website. I gave the link to the site because I don't know what to write for the catalogue since it doesn't have any publishing number and it is free of use. Also there is no equivalent of portraying Milica Steric except this photo and others that I uploaded. VojinDaut (talk) 20:15, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
SAS catalogue, presumably, was copyrighted as well. Any proof that it was in public domain?
Furthermore, Wikimedia Commons has no exception for fair use for deceased people, that belongs to domain of indivudual Wikipedias: For example, Serbian Wikipedia has an exception for such fair use, and copyrighted file would be uploaded there, not here on Commons.
Ђидо (talk) 08:48, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also, exception (on Serbian Wikipedia) is valid for one photo, to be used only in one article. Ђидо (talk) 08:48, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Since the photo is first published in 1984, it is still under copyright of whoever owns Energoproject assets. Photos from former Yugoslavia are in public domain if first time published before 1966. Ђидо (talk) 09:01, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Röm.-Kath. Pfarramt in Wangen a. Aare.jpg[edit]

Irrtümlich doppelt hochgeladen und dieses Foto ist falsch beschriftet. Abgebildet wird nicht das Kath. Pfarramt sondern ein Wohnhaus. JoachimKohler-HB (talk) 20:07, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Unicah Logo.png[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Εὐθυμένης as Logo Yann (talk) 20:27, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Штайнмец, Миклош.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by MasterRus21thCentury as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Сомнительный правовой статус - в Медиабанке РИА Новости находится репродукция фотографии из Архива ЦМ ВС РФ и она де-факто может быть в общественном достоянии, несмотря на то, что репродукцию сделала Галина Киселёва. Yann (talk) 20:29, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:The Legend of Vox Machina title card 2021.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by 185.172.241.184 as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: copyvio Yann (talk) 20:38, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Barbie Dreamburger.jpg[edit]

Likely copyrighted work. Ooligan (talk) 21:00, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:"Music in Monk Timer" on Qwest TV.png[edit]

Mistakenly sent. I thought I was sending this to an editor on a talk page thread. Thedevoutcatalyst (talk) 21:07, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:"Music in Monk Timer" on Qwest TV.png[edit]

Mistakenly sent. I thought I was sending this to an editor on a talk page thread. Thedevoutcatalyst (talk) 21:08, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[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.

File:2019 Disney Channel logo.svg[edit]

Copyright infringement as in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Disney channel 2019.png. The swirl on the "i" of Disney has been considered that it exceeds COM:TOO US in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Disney-channel-new2015.png. —MarcoAurelio 11:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Comment Two points or circles on the i, ï, does not meet the threshold of originality needed for copyright. Everyone knows the owner is disney, but it's not copyviolo .--EEIM (talk) 20:17, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Delete . File:2014 Disney Channel logo.svg, File:2019 Disney Channel logo.svg , File:Disney channel 2019.png , File:Disney Channel Germany Logo 2014.png , File:Disney Channel logo (2014).svg . Wikipedia does not need all logos (1) It's enough, this or this .--EEIM (talk) 20:38, 2 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Keep. Does not match the threshold of originality needed to be a copyright violation. KamranMackey (talk) 16:17, 31 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kept: as per above comments. --Yann (talk) 18:11, 4 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2019 Disney Channel logo.svg[edit]

file without CC license and taken from an internet page JosefinaDiLeo (talk) 21:39, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Delete: According to the source of the file, it was taken from a website, which is not a reliable source, therefore it should be deleted
JosefinaDiLeo (talk) 21:46, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Comment: The file was taken from this page https://logos.fandom.com/wiki/Disney_Channel?so=search JosefinaDiLeo (talk) 21:51, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Delete:unncessary logo. And delete this File:Disney channel 2019.png. We can use File:Disney Channel logo (2014).svg or File:Disney Channel text logo.svg .
Deletion discussions from 2014 - 16
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 Kwangmo (talk · contribs)[edit]

Unused unencyclopedic personal images outside our scope. My Gawd! There are so many of these. I have not nominated all images of this user. I have kept few which could be useful. But please go through the lot once to see something could be useful.

Please add comments below the gallery.

§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 10:48, 15 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

sorry but I am not sure about what is useful and not. can you give me the written guideline for it? thank you. Kwangmo (talk) 13:09, 15 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
plz exclude File:Choikwangmoku11.jpg and File:Choikwangmoku262.jpg from the list. I think these are worth it. thank you. Kwangmo (talk) 13:45, 15 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
See Commons:Project Scope. In the case of these images, it's generally a case of the background is within scope, but the fact you have a few people hamming it up for the camera takes it out of scope. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:49, 15 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted: out of project scope, not used. No reason to exclude File:Choikwangmoku11.jpg nor File:Choikwangmoku262.jpg Julo (talk) 16:38, 17 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[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 Kwangmo (talk · contribs)[edit]

Out of scope.

   FDMS  4    19:21, 6 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted by Yann.    FDMS  4    19:10, 13 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[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 Kwangmo (talk · contribs)[edit]

Does not look like it is inside the scope. (Some has {{Personality rights}} issues.) I only looked at uploads after 2015-01-01, so there might be old files waiting for deletion.

— Revi 11:26, 27 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think all photos are in the range of scope and as for the photos I took, I can assure you that there is no personality issue. If it is mandatory to give clear evidence for every photo, how can we maintain rich source of contribution? below file are much important and I think it is clear in the scope. First one shows the ceremonial dress of korea firefighter, second is about the person who is my great-grandfather and he is on the korean wikipedia now, which also shows no problem relevant to copyright as I wrote in the explaination section.

thank you.Kwangmo (talk) 15:08, 27 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have to mention that your great-grandfather's article is on AfD. Anyway it is in use, I withdraw for that file. — Revi 15:22, 27 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If it is true that the article of Mr. Seo in wikipedia is to be deleted, there is no reason that it is deleted from commons since each has different standard. thank you. --Kwangmo (talk) 11:12, 28 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In my opinion, many of files you requested for deletion show how korea firefighters work, live, and communicate, which makes it understandable that they have educational purpose. --Kwangmo (talk) 11:25, 28 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]


The person in the above files is Nam-sangho, who used to be the chief of entire korea fire service. his article(https://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EB%82%A8%EC%83%81%ED%98%B8). --Kwangmo (talk) 11:31, 28 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted most. kept 4 as possibly in scope or user page images. --JuTa 22:37, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[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 Kwangmo (talk · contribs) (4)[edit]

Out of scope, unused. Some has COM:IDENT issues.

The last one above could be a copyright violation (Cover artwork). I´ll nominate it as such. --Rudolph Buch (talk) 15:25, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

— Revi 09:08, 12 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I sent the mail to OTRS as below. Thank you. --Kwangmo (talk) 14:24, 12 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

http://www.evernote.com/l/AMLry-yIjtRERqh-o160miijgN3Cbdmg_aw/

Deleted. most as out of scope. Some because of COM:DW, COM:Packaging and/or no confirmed permission by the author. --JuTa 22:50, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[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 Kwangmo (talk · contribs)[edit]

Large number of files credited to various different organizations with no evidence of permission for reuse on Commons under a free license. Uploader has been warned and blocked in the past for continuing to upload copyright images without permission.

DAJF (talk) 00:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for your advice. As for permissions of the the photos I uploaded, refer to the links below. Thank you.
OTRS Permission for photos by Korea Fire Service (Ticket Number=2014082010012097)
OTRS Permission for photos by Seoul Metropolitan Fire & Disaster Headquarters (Ticket Number=2015063010008898)
OTRS Permission for photos by Gangwon Fire and Rescue (Ticket Number=2015120310010316)
OTRS Permission for photos by Fire Prevention News (Ticket Number=2015091210004125)
최광모 (talk) 12:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Kwangmo: As explained at Commons:OTRS, I believe you need to add the code {{subst:OP}} to each individual image so that permission can then be verified by an OTRS volunteer. It would save yourself time and unnecessary hassle if you did this when you upload new images. --DAJF (talk) 13:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Kwangmo: As I've been mailed on this: There seems to be a misstake, I can't help you there, because I'm not an OTRS member. --PaterMcFly (talk) 14:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 17:19, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[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 Kwangmo (talk · contribs)[edit]

These are apparently copyrighted buildings in South Korea, where there is no commercial freedom of panorama. Buildings do not seem to have been built more than 70 years ago, or authored by architects who died more than 70 years ago, to satisfy public domain status. Relevent commercial license permissions from architects of the nominated buildinga here, or their heirs if they are already dead, are required. Note: the user has uploaded tons of Korean buildings, some review is also needed for other buildings shared by this user as well.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 22:36, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Materialscientist (talk) 02:23, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Paris 75015 Boulevard Garibaldi no 082 Métro Sèvres-Lecourbe.jpg[edit]

There is no freedom of panorama in France. Ox1997cow (talk) 22:59, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Keep. Photo of a street. Remote view of the ugly tower notwithstanding. -- Asclepias (talk) 15:42, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
     Oppose However, Tour Montparnasse is too prominent in this image. Ox1997cow (talk) 23:31, 15 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:50centpiece2002.jpg[edit]

Per COM:CUR Canada, this coin cannot be uploaded. Ox1997cow (talk) 23:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I uploaded the image, but didn't realize it was still protected. Please delete as necessary. Snd3054 (talk) 17:45, 14 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Mapa de la ruta del río sonora.jpg[edit]

Image is a replica of the PDF from source. The source doesn't provide a free license. Günther Frager (talk) 23:13, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/2023/11/13&oldid=824869437"