Commons:Deletion requests/2023/10/28

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
27 October 2023
29 October 2023
Deletion requests on 28 October 2023

October 28[edit]

File:Cogenital curvature of the Penis to the upper left.jpg[edit]

Commons:Nudity#New uploads of penis photo, not special enough to be educationally useful A1Cafel (talk) 02:49, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •  Comment Could be useful in showing the curvature of a penis. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:07, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Keep seems to have been uploaded with an educational purpose in mind Dronebogus (talk) 19:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The curvature is not clear, IMO we had better options for a curve penis. --A1Cafel (talk) 06:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wouldn't it make sense to show different expressions of possible curvatures? This could help to differentiate between "normal" and severe curvatures. Leon2667 (talk) 14:13, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:37, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files in Category:Swords of Qādisiyyah[edit]

The monument was completed in 1989 by Khaled al-Rahal (1926–1986) and Mohammed Ghani Hikmat (1929–2011). There is no freedom of panorama in Iraq. The copyright term of the country is 50 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2062.

A1Cafel (talk) 03:32, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Phryges Paris 2024 peluche.jpg[edit]

per COM:TOYS. 0x0a (talk) 03:52, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why ? I don't understand the problem of this picture ? Can you explain your deletion request please. Edoirefaitdel'art (talk) 17:23, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The FAQ page describes such case in detail. TLDR: Toys can be copyrighted. You own the copyright of the photo, but you don't own the copyright of the toy design. Therefore, the photo cannot be freely used without permission from the copyright owner of the toy. 0x0a (talk) 19:14, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear 0x0a, I understand your opinion and I think it's technically correct. But let's be pragmatic, it's in everyone's interest to keep this image. It's in Wikimedia's interest to illustrate our articles, but it's also in the interest of the Olympic Committee, for whom using this image is more effective advertising than a non-illustrated article. Regards. ----Abalg (talk) 06:35, 31 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Adrian, I have no objection to using it in Wikipedia articles, provided that a fair use rationale is met. However, it can't be hosted on Commons unless the copyright holder (Paris 2024 Organising Committee) sends a permission to Commons via VRT. 0x0a (talk) 15:20, 31 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files in Category:Bing Dwen Dwen and Shuey Rhon Rhon[edit]

per COM:TOYS.

0x0a (talk) 04:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Flag PCN.svg[edit]

This flag doesn't fit as {{PD-textlogo}} or {{PD-shape}} because it includes a photo of two hands, making it impossible to classify them as a geometric figure or text. Therefore it cannot be an image in the public domain. Taichi (talk) 04:48, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files in Category:Ear by Aldo Andreani (after Wildt)[edit]

Unfortunately there's no FOP in Italy and the artist of this Sculpture, Aldo Andreani, died in 1971. So these images are copyrighted until at least 2042.

Adamant1 (talk) 04:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is this the policy for derative works? As the sculpture is a mere copy of a detail from Adolfo Wildt, authour already in PD... --Sailko (talk) 08:32, 29 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
the sculpture is a mere copy of a detail from Adolfo Wildt Actually they aren't. If you compare the two sculptures they have a different design. Although I'll grant you that Aldo Andreani was inspired by the original, but it's an extreme stretch to call his version a "mere copy" or durative of it. --Adamant1 (talk) 12:42, 29 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Gillbrg.jpg[edit]

probably a copyvio (low resolution and no exif) Sismarinho le blasé (talk) 05:06, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Disney Junior 2019 logo.png[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Krd as no permission (No permission since). Should be discussed. Basic Disney logo has been kept per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Disney+ logo.svg. Complex Disney Junior logo with colors and shading has been deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Disney Junior Logo.png. This one is in-between. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:34, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Playhouse-disney logo.png[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Krd as no permission (No permission since). COM:TOO? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:PBSKIDSSprout.png[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Krd as no permission (No permission since)

COM:TOO? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:37, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Storica chiesa vallà.jpg[edit]

This file was initially tagged by ZioNicco as no source (No source since) MrKeefeJohn (talk) 09:02, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The photo is a vintage postcard, author unknown and the time of shooting unknown in any case the license cannot be correct ZioNicco (talk) 09:04, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:United Provinces of La Plata General Assembly 1914.svg[edit]

This is a fictitious scheme, there has never been a country called "United Provinces of La Plata" in 1914.  Goldsztern  ✶  09:12, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files uploaded by Srg0782~commonswiki (talk · contribs)[edit]

this logo must be too complicated and over COM:TOO.

RZuo (talk) 09:22, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Silmäterä.jpg[edit]

Description states that Heini Heikkilä owns copyright, so this is not CC licensed. / In Finnish: Wikimedia Commonsiin voi ladata vain töitä, jotka on lisensoitu Creative Commons -lisenssillä eli kuka tahansa saa käyttää niitä maksutta. Tämä Heini Heikkilän teos ei ole sellainen, jos hän ei itse ole sitä niin lisensoinut. Onsilla (talk) 10:15, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Teos on lisensoitu asianmukaisesti ja suomenkielinen kuvailuteksti virheellinen, koska tekijä ei ollut tietoinen asiasta. This is CC licensed. The description in finnish is not correct. The permission for usage of the image is given by Heini Heikkilä. Kalliosuon Sisu (talk) 17:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voit käyttää VRT-järjestelmää virallisen luvan antamiseen, jos voit/tiedät kuka sen voi antaa tälle työlle: Commons:Wikimedia VRT release generator. Onsilla (talk) 08:35, 29 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tajik License Plate Font Comparison.svg

File:ArVaspurakan.jpg[edit]

Resolution is too low, other versions with higher res exist on Commons RSVartanian (talk) 10:47, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files found with Special:Search/Rick212[edit]

Very tiny images, even by 2006 standards and likely to be COM:FLICKRWASH

Adeletron 3030 (talk) 11:26, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:1992 ICC Cricket World Cup trophy.png[edit]

Cropped from an image montage with no verifiable source Adeletron 3030 (talk) 11:38, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Editing to add: Looks like this was originally cropped out of this Press Association photo: https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-england-captain-graham-gooch-with-the-cricket-world-cup-trophy-108994237.html?irclickid=Uf3yTQyn3xyPUdwxvA3BLyimUkFQT6QnNw67QE0&utm_source=77643&utm_campaign=Shop%20Royalty%20Free%20at%20Alamy&utm_medium=impact&irgwc=1 Adeletron 3030 (talk) 11:40, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Adeletron 3030: The original file is here on Commons: File:Cricket World Cup Trophies.jpg. Groete. --  SpesBona 12:18, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@SpesBona yes, but the image you cropped out is originally from the PA photo I linked to above. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 14:30, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:JD Gaminglogo profile.webp[edit]

This image does not have license Ctdbsclvn (talk) 11:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Dirty Business.jpg[edit]

Possible copyvio: Album cover CoffeeEngineer (talk) 13:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Files in Category:Monuments and memorials in Foča[edit]

Seems to be a monument in B&H, which has no freedom of panorama. Considering this is a monument for the Yugoslav war, which only started in 1991, it is doubtful that this mounment is public domain.

—MATRIX! {user - talk? - useless contributions} 13:26, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you doubt the freedom of specific images, nominate the image/s but not the whole category. Wikimedia Commons categories are not the objects of copyright or FOP rights issues, only photo images are. There may be images that are ok (age) inside the category. Bjoertvedt (talk) 14:06, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Matrix has already done that. This deletion nomination is for the three specific images listed above, not the entire contents of the category. Omphalographer (talk) 03:42, 29 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bjoertvedt: That's what I did. The heading just comes up like that because of COM:VFC. —MATRIX! {user - talk? - useless contributions} 18:03, 29 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Delete, Bosnian FoP disallows commercial uses, which means use of commercial-type Creative Commons licenses like CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, and CC-zero are forbidden. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 06:09, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Logo Liane Alimentos.jpg[edit]

Logo of a company of the food sector from Brazil, zero chance of being own work and highly unlikely to be under a free license. Solon 26.125 13:41, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Votes-for-women-penny.jpg[edit]

The source website lists the licence as CC-BY-NC-ND - meaning that the license doesn't allow commercial and derivative use which are needed for use on Commons. Really sorryǃ Lajmmoore (talk) 14:13, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •  Keep The coin design is in the public domain, plus scanning a coin does not generate any new copyright. 0x0a (talk) 16:59, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Portrait of Pieter van Maldere.jpg[edit]

Fake. This is portrait of Thomas Linley the eder by Thomas Gainsborough (see here) in very, very low quality. Hoa binh (talk) 14:40, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Astronaut Chris Hadfield just gave Richard Branson his astronaut wings.jpg[edit]

Appears to be a screenshot of this video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tYrUcenHKc4 (around the 2:35 mark). The metadata indicates the image a screenshot ad well. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 14:59, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Delete as Copyvio. There is no onward licence that I can find at the Youtube video, suggesting that this has been Flickrwashed. 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 15:15, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Меморіальна дошка Олені Кульчицькиї у Львові.jpg[edit]

There is no freedom of panorama in Ukraine and the photos violate sculptors and architects copyright. Created after 1967. Derivatives of work. No Permission from the sculptor. Микола Василечко (talk) 15:03, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •  Delete, eligible for U.S. copyright too due to Uruguay Round Agreements Act. Assuming the sculptor died a few years after the sculpture was first publicly-displayed, then it will fall out of copyright in Ukraine sooner but the image should not be deleted until U.S. copyright on monument expires, 95+1 years after 1967 (assuming 1967 was indeed the date of the monument). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:50, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Violin Sonata No. 2 - Allegro con brio (Prokofiev).gif[edit]

This file was initially tagged by RoodyAlien as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Prokofiev died in 1953. I upload this file, when I was 17. I'm really sorry :(

1944 song, Undelete in 2040 (works by this author become public domain in Russia in 2027). Abzeronow (talk) 15:37, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I uploaded this file. I think it should be deleted. RoodyAlien (talk) 13:30, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2023-06-30 Handreichung WLM Friedhofsfotografie.pdf[edit]

File restored and nominated for deletion after my maybe too hasty speedy deletion was contested. - Background: This is a practical guide ("Handreichung") created by a law firm on behalf of Wikimedia Deutschland (WMDE) for the "Wiki Loves Monuments" (WLM) campaign "Wiki Loves Friedhofskultur", dealing with legal aspects of taking photographs on cemeteries in Germany.

However, in this discussion in German Wikipedia's copyright questions forum, after I pointed out that some parts of this guide don't seem to correspond to what Wikipedia states with extensive sources from legal scholarship, Gnom (who has a professional legal background in copyright, see his user profile) informed us that, in fact, there was already a discussion with WMDE, including Holger Plickert (WMDE) and Christoph Jackel (WMDE), which resulted in an agreement to no longer use this guide, as it contains many legal inaccuracies. Gnom also suggested deleting the document.

So, I thought, as there is no use for this document anymore, I could delete it without going through a deletion request, but as Stepro insisted (probably rightly so) on the formal process, well, here it's now up for discussion. Gestumblindi (talk) 15:45, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there. I followed the discussion around this document but can not remember having taken a stand on using it or not. For the purpose of an overview for participants shooting pictures for the special price of this year's Wiki Loves Monuments Deutschland I uploaded File:Flyer WLM für Friedhöfe 2023.pdf and File:Flyer WLM für Teilnehmende 2023.pdf. For that, I consulted different material including the document mentioned here. Best regards Christoph Jackel (WMDE) (talk) 09:05, 30 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Liebe Community, wir haben eure Beiträge gelesen. Die Handreichung wurde von Wikimedia Deutschland in Auftrag gegeben und wir sehen darin auch trotz der formulierten Kritik eine fachlich gut informierte Grundlage, um sich selbst unter Nachschlagen in weiterer Literatur ein eigenes Urteil zu bilden und sich der rechtlichen Implikationen und Fallstricke, aber auch der Möglichkeiten des Fotografierens auf Friedhöfen bewusst zu werden. Ein wichtiges Ziel dieser Handreichung war für uns, dass sie allen, die sich nach diesen Empfehlungen verhalten, eine größtmögliche Rechtssicherheit geben soll. Es ist kein Rechtsgutachten und war so auch nicht gedacht. Juristische Handreichungen und Gutachten wie auch Urteile und Entscheidungen bis hoch zum Bundesverfassungsgericht können unterschiedlich und kontrovers ausfallen. Aus diesem Grund teilen wir die hier formulierte Einschätzung nicht und unterstützen den Löschantrag auch nicht. Wir nehmen aber gerne inhaltliche Kritikpunkte weiter auf und geben sie zur Prüfung an JBB Rechtsanwälte, die die Handreichung erstellt haben. Viele Grüße --Dominik Scholl (WMDE) (talk) 13:47, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  •  Delete - out of scope. A how-to for special copyright issues might be held by commons, if and only if it is considered useful by the relevant people. As this specific document is deeply flawed and has been discarded for the original usage, I can't see where it fits into the scope of Commons. --h-stt !? 18:13, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Keeping it despite these issues would be dissemination of misleading documents. --h-stt !? 22:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Deleting it would be a violation of neutral / multiple point of view. The fact, that some Wikipedians don't like what they read, doesn't means that this is wrong. There are actually different opinions on this topic. Then you have to deal with it and not simply dismiss the opinion of a recognized copyright law firm as wrong or discredit it with lies about the intentions of the WMDE employees. I'm somewhat appalled by this line of argument here. Stepro (talk) 22:56, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    This document is not referenced by any sources, neither print nor web. While the Commons policy on FoP, which has different statements on cemeteries, is very well referenced. --A.Savin 23:27, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Delete per nomination. Legal documents like this, should have valid reference. However this one is not just unreferenced, but also most likely contains false statements which discourage users from contributing photos taken on cemeteries. I really don't think we do the project a favor in hosting such content. --A.Savin 19:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Keep It is a complete mystery to me how "a practical guide created by a law firm dealing with legal aspects of taking photographs on cemeteries in Germany" could be out of scope. Addressing copyright issues is an important part of Commons. And here is an elaboration on this topic, which is available under a free license. --Stepro (talk) 22:14, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Nachtrag: nachdem einige WMDE-Mitarbeiter hier geantwortet haben, kann man die Aussage, dass WMDE nicht mehr hinter dieser Handreichung steht, bestenfalls als falsch, mit ABF auch als Lüge bezeichnen. Damit wäre auch dieser vermeintliche Löschgrund gegenstandslos. Stepro (talk) 14:47, 2 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Delete offensichtlich fehlerhaftes Material, sowas brauchen wir nicht aufheben. Ralf Roletschek 10:00, 29 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment After the reply by Dominik Scholl (WMDE), I have to say that I'm surprised, as I understood Gnom's statement in the German discussion "Wir hatten diese Angelegenheit schon einmal off-wiki diskutiert – auch unter Beteiligung von Holger Plickert (WMDE) und Christoph Jackel (WMDE) – und uns darauf geeinigt, dieses Gutachten besser wieder zügig „in der Versenkung verschwinden“ zu lassen (...)", naturally I'd say, such as that WMDE no longer wants to use this document and they would support deleting it. As Dominik from WMDE now states "Aus diesem Grund teilen wir die hier formulierte Einschätzung nicht und unterstützen den Löschantrag auch nicht", this doesn't seem to be the case. I will not withdraw the deletion request, as there are still valid arguments for deleting this guide because of apparent errors, and WMDE can host and use the document elsewhere if deleted here, but I'll concede that the grounds for the deletion request are weaker now. Gestumblindi (talk) 08:37, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Keep This "handout" is focussing on taking photos. Maybe it isnt well designed for the purpose on wikipedia for using the photos, as we only take care of copyright and ignoring problems like the permission of getting into a graveyard-areal. In the statements posted, there is only a disagreement of beeing public or not, where the handout has another view than WM(DE). Other problematical details arent named in the discussions. Deleting this seems to be "you have another point of view? Then we will delete it." At this time we have no other handout, so there is one view against another view. Maybe adding a note, that this paper isn't a policy or had any agreement with WMFs / commons policies, could be handled. Maybe there will be another handout at some time, then everyone can compare it and can get her/his own opinion about it. --Quedel (talk) 19:06, 3 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:19860322 Adderley.jpg[edit]

Not the uploaders own work as claimed. UK marriage certificates are subject to Crown Copyright (see [1] section 2.3) Nthep (talk) 15:52, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please kindly change the copyright as needed then. This will not be hosted anywhere so cannot be cited as you keep requesting, this is proof contradicting the letter of 2018, again which cannot be hosted anywhere and cited. Iopcpoi (talk) 15:55, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


File:Milica Kacin Wohinz.png[edit]

Replaced with a better crop (lossless, original size) at File:Milica Kacin Wohinz in 2008.jpg. –Vipz (talk) 15:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Boris Pahor.png[edit]

Replaced with a better crop (lossless, original size) at File:Boris Pahor in 2008.jpg. –Vipz (talk) 15:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Marta Verinella.png[edit]

Replaced with a better crop (lossless, original size) at File:Marta Verginella in 2008.jpg. –Vipz (talk) 15:59, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Stavros Niarchos Foundation Cultural Center - 52035687072.jpg[edit]

The building in question was only built in 2016. As a result and since there's no FOP in Greece this photo should be deleted. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 18:57, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Stavros Niarchos Foundation Cultural Center - 52035297532.jpg[edit]

The building in question was only built in 2016. As a result and since there's no FOP in Greece this photo should be deleted. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 18:59, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Stavros Niarchos Foundation Cultural Center - 52035684642.jpg[edit]

The building in question was only built in 2016. As a result and since there's no FOP in Greece this photo should be deleted. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 19:00, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:20180815 Page 1.jpg[edit]

not the uploaders own work (unless they are the Northamptonshire Police and Crime Commissioner) Nthep (talk) 15:56, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:20180815 Page 2.jpg[edit]

not the uploaders own work as claimed (unless they are the Northamptonshire Police & Crime Commissioner) Nthep (talk) 15:55, 28 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •  Delete The Police & Crime commissioners in England are elected officials and the bodies they represent (while public entities) are not Crown bodies subject to Crown copyright. Therefore, normal copyright rules for private entities apply. Without evidence of permission to upload under a valid licence, this file must be deleted. From Hill To Shore (talk) 13:41, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/2023/10/28&oldid=822037978"