Commons:Deletion requests/2023/10/17

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
16 October 2023
18 October 2023
Deletion requests on 17 October 2023

October 17[edit]

Files uploaded by Radha Krishna Nama (talk · contribs)[edit]

Unlikely own work. Facebook sized and no metadata. Uploader uses a camera that produces valid metadata.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Me and the rabbit.jpg[edit]

Not a selfie, but licensed as own work. Suggest this is borrowed from someone else as it was taken "on set" per description. Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:22, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Keep I see no problem with this one, you are probably right but this also can be done with a self-timer. Also, this photograph is used on Silvia_Collatina. The problem here, may be than the user "Silvia Collatina" is not be the real one, but i did not find the photograph of this account on other site than Wikimedia, so they probably where not stolen from somewhere else. Miniwark (talk) 10:21, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is too much uncertainty in your statement for COM:PRP not to apply. She "may" be the subject. There "might have been" a timer. The simple answer is most likely that someone else took the photo and is not credited. Cheers. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:51, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment In use in 2 projects. No other versions found in reverse image searches. I have more than once noted that camera timers are very common and easy to use, not as some seem to assume something bizarre and unlikely. Were these the only factors, I would have agreed with Miniwark and voted keep. However on the other hand, I note that the user's only other uploads have been deleted as copyviols. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:36, 27 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files in Category:Vitraux de Jacques Wasem (Saint-Martin, Onex)[edit]

Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Switzerland stained glass windows don't qualify for FOP as they are considered to be part of the buildings interior. So these images are copyrighted per the normal term of 70+ after the artists death, which in this case would 2056 since the artist Jacques Wasem died in 1985.

Adamant1 (talk) 03:21, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Delete Quote last two phrases of sections Accessible to the Public in FOP Switzerland. It is generally held that the interior of a church cannot be depicted under Article 27. Commons opinion is that stained glass windows should be considered part of interior spaces. Works in interior spaces are not in the PD per FOP Switzerland. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 21:10, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Keep the first file which is from the exterior of the church.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 00:05, 25 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is just my opinion of course, but the law doesn't say "works that are outside" qualify for FOP. It says "works that are accessible to the Public on a de-facto basis" do. So I don't think the first image would qualify for freedom of panorama since the window is on private property and therefore clearly not "accessible to the Public on a de-facto basis." That doesn't magically change just because someone walked on to private property to take the image. --Adamant1 (talk) 02:35, 25 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Files in Category:1986 stamps of Liechtenstein[edit]

Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Liechtenstein stamps of Liechtenstein are likely copyrighted per the normal term of 70+ years after the artist death. In this case the artist, Ludwig Schnüriger, died in 1991. So these images should be deleted until at least 2062.

Adamant1 (talk) 03:38, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Files in Category:Paul Louzier[edit]

Unfortunately there's no FOP in France and the artist of these windows, Paul Louzier, died in 1972. So these images are copyrighted until at least 2043.

Adamant1 (talk) 03:56, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Files in Category:Claude Baillon[edit]

Unfortunately there is no FOP in France and the artist of these windows, Claude Baillon, seems to still be alive. So these images should be deled until an undetermined date unless someone can provide evidence to the contrary.

Adamant1 (talk) 04:03, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Files in Category:Louis Balmet[edit]

Unfortunately there's no FOP in France and the artist of these windows, Louis Balmet, died in 1957. So these images are copyrighted until at least 2078.

Adamant1 (talk) 04:09, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Szymbark. Ruiny zamku (3).jpg[edit]

Nie wyświetla się Gorofil (talk) 07:28, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files in Category:To our liberators[edit]

Unfortunately there's no FOP in Luxemburg and the sculptor of this monument, Michel Heintz, died in 2013. So these images are copyrighted until at least 2084.

Adamant1 (talk) 08:16, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Nuna Collection.png[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Gnomingstuff as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G10 Not very spammy, but I cannot find a good category. Regular deletion request is created to determine educational value. Taivo (talk) 08:34, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Maybe more simply accurate than spammy, but the thing is, descriptions can be edited by anyone, including you. Why not  Keep it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:43, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Kalamakia cave excavations in 2001 084.jpg[edit]

Uploaded by myself. Almost duplicate of File:Kalamakia cave excavations in 2001 08 with no aditional informations. Miniwark (talk) 09:51, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by Dipayan Banik (talk · contribs)[edit]

These files are not made by the uploader, as this person can be seen on the photo. So these images are copyright violation. Please also note Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dipayan banik.jpg

Ellywa (talk) 12:02, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:David E. Twiggs with congressional sword.png[edit]

David E. Twiggs with congressional sword.png Lbrennen (talk) 13:47, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Lbrennen Why should the image be deleted? You didn't present a reason. Cosma Seini (talk) 14:17, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is not a photograph of General David E. Twiggs.  It is a photo of General William Jenkins Worth.  This error has been propagated by the mistaken identification of two photographs on the National Archives (NARA) website at: https://catalog.archives.gov/id/528455 and https://catalog.archives.gov/id/528178
A photograph of the true David E. Twiggs can be viewed at:
1.   The Library of Congress: https://www.loc.gov/pictures/resource/cwpb.07556/?co=civwar
2.   The Metropolitan Museum of Art: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/286343
Photographs and information verifying that this particular photograph is General William Jenkins Worth can be viewed at:
1.   The National Portrait Gallery: https://npg.si.edu/object/npg_NPG.66.99
2.   Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_J._Worth#:~:text=William%20Jenkins%20Worth%20(March%201,and%20the%20Mexican%E2%80%93American%20War.&text=Hudson%2C%20New%20York%2C%20U.S.&text=San%20Antonio%2C%20Texas%2C%20U.S.
3.   Find-a-Grave:
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/3763/william-jenkins-worth
4. fortworth Magazine
(Fort Worth, Texas, is named for General William Jenkins Worth)
https://fwtx.com/news/features/general-william-jenkins-worth/ Lbrennen (talk) 14:27, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Keep as a cropped version of 'File:William J Worth.jpg' (though I continue to see a resemblance between Twiggs and the subject of the photo). Cosma Seini (talk) 16:29, 15 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:顧準.jpg[edit]

It's a historical photo. But the author and date of first publication are unknown. Should be moved to local wiki under 'Fair use'. 0x0a (talk) 14:31, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files in Category:Madonna della Lettera (Messina)[edit]

Per it:Stele della Madonna della Lettera, these statues were modelled by the sculptor it:Tore Edmondo Calabrò, who died in 1964. Since Italy has no FoP, these images should be restored in 2035 (1964+71). Any URAA-restored copyrights should have expired by then, since it was erected in 1934 (1934 + 96 = 2030).

Matr1x-101 {user - talk? - useless contributions} 14:40, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Files of User:末路百花残[edit]

Very likely to be copyright violation. No proper source at all. However there is still a small chance that they are published by the government.

很可能侵犯版权。所有文件皆无合适来源。但有较小可能是政府发布的公有领域图像。

-- Vikarna 18:45, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

According to filenames, most of them likely to be first published in the 9th CPC national congress in 1969. Maybe in public domain since 2019 in China. There should be proper sources to clarify. -- Vikarna 23:42, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Exception: According to the cover of this book (Yan Jianying in 1976), File:老年叶剑英.jpg was taken nearby 1976, which is not in PD yet. -- Vikarna 00:07, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Delete, no source, bogus "own work" claims. --Wcam (talk) 01:25, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Delete. Ah, yes, the user has no knowledge about copyright and repeatedly upload non-free images. Akishima Yuka (talk) 15:44, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files in Category:Maison La Roche[edit]

Stumbled across this category through Commons:Deletion requests/File:Maison La Roche Le Corbusier.jpg. Though the building might seem plain to modern eyes, Villa La Roche is a famous pioneering work of modern architecture (for more information on its status see French Wikipedia) by Le Corbusier who died in 1965, so it's still protected by copyright, and there is no freedom of panorama in France.

I'm including models of the building as COM:DW in this request, as well as drawings like File:Axonometria.JPG, but not mere floor plans like File:Planta Biblioteca.jpg. I also think that something like File:Configuracion generica.jpg is too abstracted for copyright protection. File:1ssda.jpg seems to be a borderline case, but I didn't include it. I would also put {{NoFoP-category}} in the category but will wait until this DR has been processed.

Many of the uploads are by an apparently Spanish user "Casa le roche", so the name could suggest some connection to the building, but as the building is in France, I would assume rather someone particularly interested in that building, maybe a student of architecture, and not an official representative who could release the rights (would need a VRT permission for that anyway).

Further notes: I included File:Ubicacion.jpg for a different reason, this is based on a screenshot from Google Maps (has Google watermarks), so it's not free too. I didn't include File:La maison La Roche de Le Corbusier (Paris) (30415362708).jpg because it shows a view from the building and not much of the building is visible in that photo. Most of the buildings prominently visible in that image (to the right) look old enough to be in the public domain.

Gestumblindi (talk) 19:29, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Capitaine de Cacqueray.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Yann as no license (No license since). Circa 1948 French photograph. Possibly public domain in France but would still be in copyright in the US. Abzeronow (talk) 19:43, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, I uploaded this file, I am not sure of its license and could totaly understand if it should be delet but this photo have been taken in France by a French, represent a French and is diffused on the francophone Wikipédia so I don't see why the US law should apply.
Cordially, Belysarius (talk) 21:11, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Because of the terms of COM:Licensing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:25, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
As Ikan Kekek says, the terms of Wikimedia requires files to be free in the country of orgin (possible) and the United States (in which Wikimedia's servers are located). Since this is from 1948, it wouldn't have been public domain in France on January 1, 1996 where France had "life of the author plus 50 years" plus 8 years and 120 days wartime copyright extensions, and thus had its US copyright restored by URAA. Abzeronow (talk) 15:51, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much for your response. Belysarius (talk) 20:50, 21 October 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:Hdr Image Services Portrait Pictures Enhancement (28727899).jpeg[edit]

your opinions are asked : montage of two images missing links to media from Wikimedia Commons, hence, copyright issues ?? Roland zh (talk) 04:37, 9 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unless there are any copyright issues (not demonstrated on the deleting rationale) there is no need to delete the images, they can simply be separated in two.-- Darwin Ahoy! 15:02, 9 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Per DarwIn, kind of weird nomination... -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 02:32, 22 September 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Delete out of project scope, regardless of any copyright issues --Didym (talk) 19:55, 25 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Didym what copyrights issues??????
And how this is out of scope?
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 07:04, 26 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --JuTa 17:53, 31 January 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Hdr Image Services Portrait Pictures Enhancement (28727899).jpeg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Gnomingstuff as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G10 Already survived a DR, so no case for speedy deletion, but still out of scope in my opinion. Didym (talk) 20:46, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Keep Who cares if it is an advertisement, if the content is educative and valuable (furniture, interior decor, etc.) Darwin Ahoy! 22:31, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Delete. I'm having a hard time imagining any realistic educational use for this image. The interior design shown in the pictures is, frankly, bizarre, and the image is rather low resolution. Omphalographer (talk) 22:47, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Keep per Darwin and previous deletion request. The image is perfectly usable as a thumbnail in an article, and if the "after" portion of the composite image is strange, that might make it more interesting. An obvious possible use is in an article about interior redecorating. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:23, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Keep per above. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 03:14, 18 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Delete Small images, poor quality. Yann (talk) 11:27, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by 日本の利用者 (talk · contribs)[edit]

Previously tagged by Netora for speedy deletion with the rationale "en:GJSTU-2.0 was established in 2015. The former contents are not licensed under GJSTU-2.0. This photo was created in 2000." Converting to DR as this is not an obvious case.

King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:07, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

アップロード者として当方の見解を示します。

ウェブサイトには政府標準利用規約（第2.0版）は2016年3月に制定されたとあります。制定後に公開されたコンテンツに対し、規約が利用できるというのは間違いがありません。

しかし、それより前に公開されたコンテンツについて、その規約が利用できるとも、できないとも書かれていません。また、リストアップされた画像は制定後もホームページに掲載されていました（現在は削除されていますが、国立国会図書館によるアーカイブサイトで確認可(例:[1])。英語版では現在も掲載。 (例:[2])）。

よって、リストアップされた画像に規約が利用できるかが問題だと思いますが、明文化されていないため、難しい所です。皆様、如何お考えでしょうか。

[translation]

As an uploader, I'd like to express my opinion.

The website states that GJSTU-2.0 was formulated in March 2016. There is no doubt that GJSTU-2.0 can be used for content published after formulated.

However, it does not say that GJSTU-2.0 can or cannot be used for content published before March 2016. And, the listed images were still posted on the website even after formulate (They have now been deleted, they can be found on the National Diet Library's archive site (cf:[3]). They are still listed in the English version (cf:[4]).). Therefore, I think the issue is whether GJSTU-2.0 can be used for the images listed, but it is difficult because it is not clearly stated. Please let me know what you think,--日本の利用者 (talk) 05:22, 21 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Tara Donovan's "Untitled" .jpg[edit]

NFC, DW, no FoP. Image contains copyrighted sculpture by a living artist (Untitled by Tara Donovan), photographed in the United States (no freedom of panorama) 19h00s (talk) 23:30, 17 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/2023/10/17&oldid=824759907"