Commons:Deletion requests/2024/09/03

2 September 2024

4 September 2024

Deletion requests on 3 September 2024

September 3

File:The Loved Ones.jpg

Flyte's first album, own work! 186.173.16.66 00:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flyte barbican 2017.jpg

Is there fop for this building, A1Cafel? 186.173.16.66 00:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:FOP UK. However, I doubt this is the uploader's own work and strongly suspect a theft from somewhere on the web. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:ДАЖО 1-77-14. 1871. Метричні книги православних церков Новоград-Волинського повіту.pdf

Замінений файлом вищої якості: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%D0%94%D0%90%D0%96%D0%9E_1-77-14._1871._%D0%9C%D0%B5%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%BD%D1%96_%D0%BA%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B8_%D1%86%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2_%D0%9D%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B4-%D0%92%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%8C%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE_%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82%D1%83.pdf Alexandrtovmach (talk) 00:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Qurbanov-removebg-preview.png

There is a larger version uploaded by the same user, although the information on that file is absurd. 186.173.16.66 01:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For reference: File:ƏHƏT QURBANOV.jpg. Nakonana (talk) 18:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen that billboard before, but here it's missing the funny "Choose a quality heater" line. That's weird. What is that billboard even advertising? Is it just me or does it look like the billboard image was photoshopped into this photo? Could it be that this woman's photo is used to redact the actual copyrighted billboard? Like a creative "censor bar"? Nakonana (talk) 18:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the other one I'm talking about: File:Обочина - panoramio (7).jpg. Nakonana (talk) 18:28, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Дорога - panoramio (338).jpg

No FoP for 2D works in Crimea A1Cafel (talk) 03:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Дорога - panoramio (141).jpg

No FoP for 2D works in Crimea A1Cafel (talk) 03:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:台北市街道攝影(自動定位HOLUX) - panoramio - Tianmu peter (10).jpg

No FoP for 2D works in Taiwan A1Cafel (talk) 03:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Планетарий - panoramio (2).jpg

No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 03:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:後龍縱貫公路沿途景象 - panoramio - Tianmu peter (7).jpg

No FoP for 2D works in Taiwan A1Cafel (talk) 03:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:建築大樓攝影 - panoramio - Tianmu peter (4).jpg

No FoP for 2D works in Taiwan A1Cafel (talk) 03:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:蘆洲市急速興建中的大樓群 - panoramio - Tianmu peter (2).jpg

No FoP for 2D works in Taiwan A1Cafel (talk) 03:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete censoring the billboard like blurring or blacking it out leaves behind a random, useless and out of scope city corner image. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 06:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kuchmin yar, Kiyev, Ukraine - panoramio (89).jpg

No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 03:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What would be copyrightable in this image? The billboard could be blurred if it doesn't fall under de minis. The buildings are mostly de minimis, and, in border line de minimis cases, utilitarian. Nakonana (talk) 18:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Solom'yans'kyi district, Kiev, Ukraine - panoramio (161).jpg

No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 03:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Free Julian Assange (52503702877).jpg

Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 03:35, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demo in support of Julian Assange (53543997332).jpg

Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 03:35, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:20240901 Kopdar WIkidata Hibrida Ke 2 Slide 1.jpg

i forgot to delete some of their name. Rafarahh (talk) 03:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:DC People and Places 38989 (13352180645).jpg

No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 03:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Like Edward Snowden - Stop Watching Us, Berlin, 27.07.2013 (9383945168).jpg

Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 03:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Like Edward Snowden - Stop Watching Us, Berlin, 27.07.2013 (9381054729).jpg

Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 03:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Thank you Edward Snowden metrobus in DC (12556730895).jpg

No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 03:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shepard Fairey Revolutions Mural Chicago December 2011.jpg

Infringing copy of 2011 mural. D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 03:59, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Lisa Marie Thalhammer

No FoP for 2D works in the United States of America

A1Cafel (talk) 04:05, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stefan Martin, Artist, Printmaker - Press photo Oct 24,1973.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Timtrent as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: "Uploaded a work by Press Photo, Trenton Times, NJ from Historic Images, Oct. 12-1973 Vintage Photo with UploadWizard". Pre-1978 US photo, should be discussed. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep We have several of Press Photo, including the backs, they never copyrighted their publicity photos. --RAN (talk) 02:34, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Advertising Billboard Near Wembley and Box Park - 52690762210.jpg

No FoP for "graphic works" in the United Kingdom A1Cafel (talk) 04:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Godfather visits London.. (23567487276).jpg

No FoP for "graphic works" in the United Kingdom A1Cafel (talk) 04:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Postal covers of Ukraine

Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Ukraine postage stamps of the Ukraine are in the public domain due to being state symbols of payment. There's zero evidence that it would extend to random artwork on a postal cover just because it has a stamp on it though. Postal covers clearly aren't "laws, decrees, resolutions, court awards, State standards, etc." and that's assume they were even created by the Ukrainian government to begin with. So these images should be deleted as COPYVIO unless someone can provide to the contrary.

Adamant1 (talk) 04:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Worcester Skyline seen from Union Station Parking Garage Garage.jpg

This is a pixel shifted image, and has some artifacts from subject movement that I did not notice when uploading (see the rainbow streak from a moving car and pedestrian on the street on the left, or the artifacted flags on the center-right). This may be useful as an image to demonstrate flaws with pixel shift photography though, and I can provide a non-pixel-shifted version of this image as a comparison if that is worthwhile. 4300streetcar (talk) 05:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A non-pixel shifted image is now here:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Worcester_Skyline_seen_from_Union_Station_Parking_Garage_No_Pixel_Shift.jpg

If I format it as a comparison, I can do it similar to the other pixel-shifted image I uploaded which had similar issues here, where I point out the specific defects and give a non-pixel shifted reference here:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Worcester_Union_Station_seen_from_Union_Station_Parking_Garage_Garage.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Worcester_Union_Station_seen_from_Union_Station_Parking_Garage_No_Pixel_Shift.jpg

I can eventually update the Wikipedia article on pixel shift photography to note defects that can occur, which it currently does not discuss - there are likely several credible sources on this type of defect that can be cited. 4300streetcar (talk) 06:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keeping it and providing the contrast seems useful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ostseequerungen.JPG

Background is from Bing Maps Bigbossfarin (talk) 06:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:ملك الصواف ْ.jpg

Personal photo: out of the scope of the project Michel Bakni (talk) 06:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:أكاديمية بادري.jpg

Copyrighted Materials: Trade Mark logo Michel Bakni (talk) 06:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peter Fischer Representative MN 43A.jpg

Image is copyright of the Minnesota House of Representatives Public Information Services. See photo policy here: https://www.house.mn.gov/hinfo/photo_use.htm Petermgrund (talk) 06:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Greene022412-0839av.jpg

Image is copyright of the Minnesota House of Representatives Public Information Services. Image is a part of this series on leg.mn.gov (https://www.house.mn.gov/sessionweekly/image.asp?ls_year=87&issueid_=&storyid=3136&year_=2012&imagenum=1). See photo policy here: https://www.house.mn.gov/hinfo/photo_use.htm Petermgrund (talk) 06:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Opium by YSL.jpg

Image subject is an arrangement of copyrighted packaging. The use of the packaging is significanly greater than de minimis, as the packaging is the central focus of the photograph. The image needs to be deleted as a derivative work of non-free copyrighted packaging. BorgQueen (talk) 06:59, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:JoycePeppin.jpg

Image is copyright of the Minnesota House of Representatives Public Information Services. See photo policy here: https://www.house.mn.gov/hinfo/photo_use.htm Petermgrund (talk) 07:07, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ron Erhardt Official Photo Minnesota House of Representatives.jpg

Image is copyright of the Minnesota House of Representatives Public Information Services. See photo policy here: https://www.house.mn.gov/hinfo/photo_use.htm Petermgrund (talk) 07:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lisa Demuth.jpg

Image is copyright of the Minnesota House of Representatives Public Information Services. See photo policy here: https://www.house.mn.gov/hinfo/photo_use.htm Petermgrund (talk) 07:12, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hector Pedone.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Wdwd as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G8
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as image is from 1974 and therefore might be PD-Argentina. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Track_cycling

A dead (no one cares for / only one image) galery - Category:Track cycling is the way to go. Saibo (Δ) 00:28, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I see that there is enough stuff in the category, thus it's an interesting to people subject. And some people prefer to use Galleries, and i think it's well within scope. VolodyA! V Anarhist (converse) 13:32, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- As you can obviously see there are no people who prefer galleries here (see the "gallery"... it consits of one image since years). ;) --Saibo (Δ) 14:31, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm not going to be upset if somebody deletes it, but i still think that it should be a keep. VolodyA! V Anarhist (converse) 16:24, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - now there are two photos. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:34, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, great - thanks. A really nice gallery now. --Saibo (Δ) 23:04, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: In scope Captain-tucker (talk) 13:11, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Track cycling

This is not a gallery page: with only one photo. In my opinion a gallery page has a lot of images and the purpose is "to present readers with a structured and meaningful collection of the media found here on Wikimedia Commons" (see Commons:Galleries). This gallery page does not meet these criteria. Thought it was kept in 2011 because "there is enough stuff in the category", within 13(!) years nothing happened, no "stuff" has been added. JopkeB (talk) 07:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by LeopoldSuperCat (talk · contribs)

Out of scope: AI-generated images of people, unused outside an out-of-scope userspace sandbox on ruwiki.

Omphalographer (talk) 07:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as out of scope. Also possible copyvio as some or all were previously published under a different name on DeviantArt, without a free licence, at eg. https://www.deviantart.com/rosasmitt/art/Elizaveta-Zhuravleva-my-girlfriend-1078374023 Belbury (talk) 09:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Donald Trump supporter mocks protesters (32912615810) (cropped).jpg

Retocado Joshua Ameth Chávez Kant (talk) 07:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:The Andover, Kansas EF3 tornado.jpg

This file was initially tagged by WeatherWriter as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Per the NWS Public Domain template, Thus, all images on NWS servers are public domain (including "Courtesy of ..." and “Photo by ...” images) unless specifically stated otherwise through a copyright watermark. This specifically has a watermark on the image, therefore it is not in the public domain and is copyrighted. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:03, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is more complex than that. The image is watermarked with attribution information only, and I would say that that is not enough to claim copyright given the plain language of the disclaimer at [1] (notwithstanding the template). But that disclaimer seems to only apply to the Sioux Falls, SD office (see URL and header). The correct disclaimer is [2], and provides that "The information on National Weather Service (NWS) Web pages are in the public domain, unless specifically noted otherwise", but I don't see anything telling the uploaders that they are dedicating the image to the public domain... —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:12, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is assumed through the upload process. In the first disclaimer link you sent: “By submitting images, you understand that your image is being released into the public domain.” All the NWS offices speak for the NWS, as they are just location-based offices. Here was a previous discussion involving NWS webpage copyrighted images: [3]. The reason that image was deleted was due to it having a copyright watermark. It is rare to have a “unless specifically noted otherwise” instance on NWS webpages. this one for 1979 tornadoes is a rare exception. But looking at this web page for some 2014 tornadoes (deletion example from above), some of the images have a watermark. Some do not. NWS allows copyrighted and public domain images to be submitted. Any image with a watermark (or the rare “noted otherwise cases”) are not public domain, while any images without a watermark are considered public domain. WeatherWriter (talk) 03:26, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mdaniels5757 — You may be right. Hopefully this get’s closed soon so a verdict for these type of images. WeatherWriter (talk) 18:53, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing wrong with keeping this photo. It came directly from NWS Wichita event page, so its public domain. ChessEric (talk) 22:01, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: An attribution watermark is not an explicit claim of copyright, and per the NWS T&C, it can be reasonably assumed that the photographer understood that his work was going to become PD. —holly {chat} 00:05, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Andover, Kansas EF3 tornado.jpg

This photograph was taken by Mike Umscheid in the United States in 2022. His website is currently under maintenance (scheduled to complete on August 30), but up to very recently, this image was published there and offered for sale.

Umscheid is or was an employee of NWS Dodge City,[4] but there is no claim that he took this photo while performing his official duties, and the fact that he offers the image for sale suggests that he was taking photos on his own time. There is no reason to think that this image is ineligible for copyright for any other reason.

As a photo taken in the United States after 1989, copyright came into being as soon as it was made.

This image was originally uploaded to the Commons under a CC-0 tag, although there was no evidence that this ever applied to this image. Another user then re-tagged it to keep under the rationales expressed in the {{PD-NWS}} template at the time; that

when the weather.gov general disclaimer says that material not in the public domain will be specifically noted, it means that it must be published with a formal copyright notice. Whereas in reality, not only has the NWS never promised any specific form of notation, there is ample evidence to demonstrate this is not their general practice. This belief also chooses to ignore the words elsewhere in the disclaimer that state that third party images are used by the NWS under license, and to contact the third-party creators for re-use.
the words of a NWS Sioux City regional office policy that placed some public submissions in the public domain somehow applied to this image, although there is nothing to connect it with that office. (The photo was published by the Wichita office).

The image has already been through one DR, with the closing admin concluding that "it can be reasonably assumed that the photographer understood that his work was going to become PD"

Since then, we've learned that:

the idea that the NWS labels copyright-protected images with an explicit copyright notice is almost never true A20
the terms and conditions that place some public submissions to the Sioux City office are only one of many such conflicting terms and conditions scattered around weather.gov A3
NWS offices solicit images that they can use by permission of the photographer. eg

Without clearer evidence that Umscheid intended to place this photo in the public domain, we need to delete this under COM:PRP. Rlandmann (talk) 07:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing admins should familiarise themselves with the evidence and discussions at this RfC when closing this request.

Keep — Per the disclaimer linked at the bottom on the NWS webpage with this image, "The information on National Weather Service (NWS) Web pages are in the public domain, unless specifically noted otherwise, and may be used without charge for any lawful purpose...The information on National Weather Service Web servers and Web sites is in the public domain, unless specifically annotated otherwise, and may be used freely by the public." On the Commons, the NWS disclaimer may be enough to keep the file. A recently closed deletion request for a file under the PD-NWS template was closed as keep with the main keep rational being the NWS general disclaimer. Public domain images can be used for any purpose and may be used commercially for profit, so arguments about it being sold are not valid in my view. Based on the NWS disclaimer, the recently closed DR, and the previous DR for this image, I believe it should be kept. WeatherWriter (talk) 08:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per PRP. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 16:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And @WeatherWriter, they renominated the file. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 17:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that it’s being sold for a minimum of $50 (USD) is an even bigger indicator of its unfree status. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 17:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ignacio Fernández de Alba.webp

Out of scope: unused AI-generated "photograph" of a person. Omphalographer (talk) 07:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jacob Nunes Gois, Pintura.webp

Out of scope: fraudulent AI-generated "painting" of a person, possibly an element of a hoax. (All of the sources on the ptwiki article mentioning Gois are suspiciously recent.) Omphalographer (talk) 07:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Astrid Tiits.jpg

Old photo(s). Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected. Estopedist1 (talk) 08:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Correct license is "PD-EU-no author disclosure" --RAN (talk) 20:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Iloilo Provincial Capitol - 8766000925.jpg

Same case as Commons:Deletion requests/File:New Iloilo Prov Capitol.JPG. Violation of architect's posthumous copyright, considering the Philippines having no Freedom of Panorama.

Since enwiki already has locally-hosted images (w:en:File:Iloilo Provincial Capitol (Bonifacio Drive, Iloilo City; 10-21-2022).jpg and w:en:File:New Iloilo Prov Capitol.JPG), there is no necessity to further host more images of the capitol building there as possibly breaching w:en:WP:NOTFILESTORAGE. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:1974 Richmond, Kentucky, tornado.png

Until yesterday, this photo was one of three published at https://www.weather.gov/lmk/april31974_in_the_path with the caption "These photos were taken from Commonwealth Hall on the campus of Eastern Kentucky University. The tornado was about nine miles away from the photographer."

As a photo taken in the United States before 1989, its copyright status will depend on when it was first published and whether copyright was ever registered.

I emailed the NWS Louisville office to ask if they had any more information about where it came from.

They do not know who took the photo, or where it was first published. They do know that one of the photos from the set was published in the Richmond Register in 1988, but was attributed "file photo". They have reached out to the Register and to the person who sent them the photos (who might or might not be the original photographer) to see if they can find out more for me.

Because they are unsure whether they are publishing the file with the permission of the copyright holder (if any), they have chosen to take it and the two similar photos down from their website. As of today, they no longer appear on the NWS Louisville site.

This image was uploaded to Commons under rationales expressed in the {{PD-NWS}} template at the time; that

when the weather.gov general disclaimer says that material not in the public domain will be specifically noted, it means that it must be published with a formal copyright notice. Whereas in reality, not only has the NWS never promised any specific form of notation, there is ample evidence to demonstrate this is not their general practice. This belief also chooses to ignore the words elsewhere in the disclaimer that state that third party images are used by the NWS under license, and to contact the third-party creators for re-use.
the words of a NWS Sioux City regional office policy that placed some public submissions in the public domain somehow applied to this image, although there is nothing to connect it with that office. (The photo was published by the Louisville office).

In this specific case, the NWS is not even sure that they were publishing the image with appropriate permissions, and since we got it from them, we certainly can't be sure that this is in the public domain.

Without clearer evidence that this photograph is free of copyright or available under a free license, we need to delete this under COM:PRP. Rlandmann (talk) 08:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing admins should familiarise themselves with the evidence and discussions at this RfC when closing this request.

Uhh Strong Delete – per above. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 15:49, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Schloss Saubersdorf Kapelle.jpg

double exists 80.64.141.163 08:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Benita1337 (talk · contribs)

Bogus PD license

Gbawden (talk) 08:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Gbawden,

vielen Dank für den Hinweis bezüglich der Lizenz-Angabe.

Ich habe mit der Stadt Kaiserslautern sowie dem Stadtarchiv geklärt, dass die Dokumente unter Nennung des Namens hochgeladen werden dürfen. Mir wurde gesagt, dass die Broschüren und Flyer nicht geschützt sind da es öffentliche Dinge waren die man sich damals mitnehmen durfte.

Was genau müsste ich nun in der Beschreibung der Datei ändern damit diese nicht gelöscht wird?

Beste Grüße

Benita Benita1337 (talk) 08:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Benita1337: Gbawden kann vermutlich nicht oder nur wenig Deutsch, ich übernehme das mal. Mir scheint, Stadtarchiv und -verwaltung in Kaiserslautern haben wenig Ahnung vom Urheberrecht. Das ist nicht überraschend, generell besteht da große Ahnungslosigkeit. Auch "öffentliche Dinge, die man sich mitnehmen darf" sind nach den allgemeinen Regeln des Urheberrechts geschützt. Da Wikimedia Commons nur freie Medien will, bräuchten wir hier eine schriftliche (E-Mail) Genehmigung der jeweiligen Urheber der verwendeten Fotos, Zeichnungen und auch der Texte, wenn die ein Mindestmaß an Kreativität überschreiten. Alternativ auch eine Genehmigung von jemandem, der über vollumfängliche Nutzungsrechte verfügt, das war vielleicht im vorliegenden Fall die Stadt. Details zum Genehmigungs-Verfahren siehe COM:VRT/de. Gruß --Rosenzweig τ 08:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Rosenzweig,

vielen Dank für deine Unterstützung. Die Verwaltung in Kaiserslautern wird sich etwas überlegen; entweder wird eine schriftliche Genehmigung erteilt oder eine Lizenz angegeben.

Die von mir hochgeladenen Dateien können also erstmal gelöscht werden, sorry für den Mehraufwand.

Beste Grüße

Benita Benita1337 (talk) 09:51, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Alexandre Tchamiyè (talk · contribs)

No exif, low quality, unlikely to be own work

Gbawden (talk) 08:36, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Voidz - Like All Before You.png

Cited source only says that the band credited the artist who created the album’s artwork (@dolorsilentium). Many fans were quick to call out the fact that the artist is an AI artist, which by itself is not enough for Commons to declare that this image is unambiguously the work of a computer algorithm or artificial intelligence and does not contain sufficient human authorship to support a copyright claim and therefore public domain.

Even if the fans are right and the artist always uses AI in their work, this particular image may be a combination of AI and human authorship, for all we know. Belbury (talk) 08:49, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep from the same source: After much criticism, Julian Casablancas responds to fans disappointed by The Voidz’s AI-made artwork for their new album, 'Like All Before You.'

From Casablancas:"the [man-made] artist wanted to charge $150,000. What is this 1988? we def didn’t go out of our way to use Ai art … I just objectively – in the wilderness of art out there – liked the image and we were working with several ideas and just all objectively collectively liked it best … also it’s an Ai artist who does cool airbrush anime stuff, we didn’t just type something in… cover art @dolorsilentium. Sorry to The Scared Of News Tools tribe, truly, sorry. But art plops up, best idea/image/noise/ in the end should win … and i’m not endorsing” Ai, i don’t DWELL ON IT, but it’s part of culture now … Relax, it’s iphone”.

There was a human idea for the album cover, the design was input into the tool (like in any AI created image)—which contradicts what Julian said above about not only typing what they wanted—and the AI tool created the final result. Ideas are not copyrightable in the United States, where Casablancas is from. Tbhotch™ 09:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If there are contradictory views of how the image might have been created, Commons cannot rule that it does not contain sufficient human authorship to support a copyright claim. --Belbury (talk) 09:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I can't find anything in that post or elsewhere which makes it clear whether this person is just playing with prompts or manipulating the images, too. They certainly don't look manipulated beyond crops, but that doesn't mean much. There's not much I can find about the artist's process out there. He uses stable diffusion, and I think I'm ok concluding this is just someone who's found a way to produce a certain kind of aesthetics and decided to make it his thing. That's well and good, but I think we need more evidence that there's anything beyond prompt engineering here, no? — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gono Odhikar Parishad (GOP) registration 2024.webm

Error convert and not play. So delete for re upload — Delwar • 08:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:20190916 213223 (2) viator a.jpg

out of scope - private file without usage Xgeorg (talk) 08:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Weimar Republic Notgeld of Oldenburg (Oldb)

These German Notgeld (emergency money) bills from the 1920s are works of de:Ernst Rudolf Vogenauer, who died in 1969. So they are not in the public domain in Germany yet, and the files should be deleted. They can be restored in 2040.

Rosenzweig τ 08:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ballbingen Reunion III lineups.png

Out of scope - unused file, questionable sports event Xgeorg (talk) 08:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Supercell hail core near Stratford, Texas on May 18, 2023.jpg

Too perfect image with enhanced color and sharp edges between the clouds and the surface view. Seems to me a composition of two images. Pierre cb (talk) 00:25, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: DR was withdrawn by nominator. --Rosenzweig τ 08:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Supercell hail core near Stratford, Texas on May 18, 2023.jpg

This photograph was taken by Kyle Cutler in the United States in 2023. He published it on his X feed,[5] and in the comments that follow, we can see the license terms that he agreed to with the NWS:

@NWSAmarillo: Awesome photo! Do you mind if we use this in a web story?

@K_CuT_Wx: Thank you! Yes you can share in a web story :)

@NWSAmarillo: Awesome, thank you!

This is a rare case where we can see exactly what the photographer agreed to, and it wasn't putting the image in the public domain.

This image was uploaded to Commons on the basis that it was the work of a US federal government employee performing their duties, but no evidence was provided for this. There is no claim that this image is ineligible for copyright for any other reason.

As a photo taken in the United States after 1989, copyright came into being as soon as it was made.

The uploader later revised the rationale to keep the image under the rationales expressed in the {{PD-NWS}} template at the time; that

when the weather.gov general disclaimer says that material not in the public domain will be specifically noted, it means that it must be published with a formal copyright notice. Whereas in reality, not only has the NWS never promised any specific form of notation, there is ample evidence to demonstrate this is not their general practice. This belief also chooses to ignore the words elsewhere in the disclaimer that state that third party images are used by the NWS under license, and to contact the third-party creators for re-use. And, of course, in this instance we can see that the photographer merely gave the NWS permission to use the image, and he is simply credited "Credit: Spike Davis".
the words of a NWS Sioux City regional office policy that placed some public submissions in the public domain somehow applied to this image, although there is nothing to connect it with that office. (The photo was published by the Amarillo office).

Without clearer evidence that Cutler intended to place this photo in the public domain, we need to delete this under COM:PRP. Rlandmann (talk) 08:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing admins should familiarise themselves with the evidence and discussions at this RfC when closing this request.

Keep Creator posted on X that they were happy to see it in the public domain on Wikipedia/Wikimedia, which included a screenshot of it saying it was PD. WeatherWriter (talk) 09:10, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not seeing the part where they said anything about the public domain, so I've messaged them to verify. --Rlandmann (talk) 09:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The second image they posted was a screenshot of the Wikipedia layout, which does say “public domain” at the bottom. That seems like an acknowledgment to me. WeatherWriter (talk) 09:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's a bunch of assumptions there, which still don't stack up to evidence of permission. Let's see what they say. --Rlandmann (talk) 09:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 18:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Madeleinezillhardt-obras1.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Yann as no license (No license since) The works of art are in the public domain, but the picture looks recent. Yann (talk) 09:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Madeleine Zillhardt-faïences Patriotiques Grande Guerre.jpg

The works of art are in the public domain, but who took the picture? Yann (talk) 09:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:June 15, 1990 Nebraska F4 Tornado by Calvin Brown.jpg

This image has been sourced from a 1990 issue of the NOAA publication Storm Data

Per the source, it is credited to Calvin Brown. There is no claim that he was acting as an employee of the US federal government, so as a photo taken in the United States after 1989, copyright in this image existed as soon as it was created, belonging to him.

This image has been uploaded to Commons based on a rationale that it is covered by the site disclaimer for weather.gov and/or the submission guidelines for the Sioux City NWS office.

This file is not hosted on weather.gov, so the disclaimer for that site does not appear to apply, and was published by the NOAA in a print publication to which the Sioux City office image submission guidelines do not appear to apply. Rlandmann (talk) 09:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing admins should familiarise themselves with the evidence and discussions at this RfC when closing this request.

Delete per @Rlandmann. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 18:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dr. Kodela Siva Prasad Rao.jpg

Claimed as self-work, but there is no EXIF data nor resolution data to back up that claim. Upload from a newly registered user (not that I have anything against) with not much of a history of good uploads and thus an understanding of our policies, probably a re-upload of [6] or [7] -- DaxServer (talk) 09:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As a new user, I may not have a long history of uploads yet. But how can you nominate it for deletion with such a reason. 1WikiCont (talk) 09:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Péniche Louise Catherine Breslau, Paris, Le Corbusier kahn armee du salut-954a292c337e5973.jpg

Works by Le Corbusier are not in the public domain. Yann (talk) 09:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Madeleine Zillhardt

The works of art are in the public domain, but we need the photographer's permission.

Yann (talk) 09:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

it looks like the 3 photos shouldn't be on Commons as per their website. https://www.museeairespace.fr/credits/ Sorry Charc2018 (talk) 10:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Conchi Sánchez.jpg

Picture from around 1980, no evidence that the license is valid. Yann (talk) 09:15, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Source is an online newspaper and it has no CC-BY license [8]. Also, the image is still copyrighted in the US due to URAA (Spain has 25 years protection for simple photographs). Günther Frager (talk) 14:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Sodium tellurite3D.png

Incorrect structure: potassium and sodium are not covalently bound. Leyo 23:37, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: In use Natuur12 (talk) 15:46, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sodium tellurite3D.png

Incorrect 3D model of sodium tellurite. The salt should be displayed with a crystal structure rather than just drawing the cations and anion next to each other. In addition, the image is a composite of fragments from uncited sources. Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 09:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. File:Na2TeO3.png is the lit-based crystal structure. DMacks (talk) 15:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:East Malvern railway station - Melbourne.jpg

The result of this image is "Keep". Per COM:INUSE. This nomination will be withdrawn and this image handed over to User:Georgfotoart for contrast and quality adjustments.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This image does not have great quality, colour and contrast. It also looks very dark as well. So I would nominate this file for deletion as "delete". PEPSI697 (talk) 09:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's currently the best image we have of East Malvern station. Steelkamp (talk) 10:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point there too. When I looked at the East Malvern station category last week, I couldn't see any other better images. PEPSI697 (talk) 11:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I took this photo on an iPhone 5S on an overcast day. I would say keep this photo up for now, just until someone wants to volunteer to take a better photo on a better day with better equipment. Or, of course, if I somehow find time in the near future to do so. Effluvium1 (talk) 08:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Nor reason for deletion. -- Herbert Ortner (talk) 17:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by PEPSI697 (talk • contribs) 05:16, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:0T5A4741-Edit-2.jpg

Press / professional shot, permission from the copyright holder is needed. Yann (talk) 09:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shri Prabhakar Reddy Vemireddy.jpg

It appears to be a copyright violation. https://sansad.in/getFile/rsnew/member_site/photos/P2375.jpg?source=rajyasabha 1WikiCont (talk) 09:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Supercell with an EF3 tornado on June 23, 2023.jpg

This photograph was taken by Jake Thompson in the United States in 2023. He published it on his X feed,[9] and in the comments that follow, we can see the license terms that he agreed to with the NWS:

@NWSPueblo: Hey Jake, would we have permission to use this photo for write ups, spotter talks, and other educational purposes with credit to you?

@ChaserJake94: Yes, of course!

@NWSPueblo: Thank you so much!

This is a rare case where we can see exactly what the photographer agreed to, and it wasn't putting the image in the public domain. It doesn't even give the NWS permission to use it for all purposes.

This image was uploaded to Commons on the basis that it was the work of a US federal government employee performing their duties, but no evidence was provided for this. There is no claim that this image is ineligible for copyright for any other reason.

As a photo taken in the United States after 1989, copyright came into being as soon as it was made.

The uploader later revised the rationale to keep the image under the rationales expressed in the {{PD-NWS}} template at the time; that

when the weather.gov general disclaimer says that material not in the public domain will be specifically noted, it means that it must be published with a formal copyright notice. Whereas in reality, not only has the NWS never promised any specific form of notation, there is ample evidence to demonstrate this is not their general practice. This belief also chooses to ignore the words elsewhere in the disclaimer that state that third party images are used by the NWS under license, and to contact the third-party creators for re-use.
the words of a NWS Sioux City regional office policy that placed some public submissions in the public domain somehow applied to this image, although there is nothing to connect it with that office. (The photo was published by the Pueblo office).

Without clearer evidence that Thompson intended to place this photo in the public domain, we need to delete this under COM:PRP. Rlandmann (talk) 09:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Closing admins should familiarise themselves with the evidence and discussions at this RfC when closing this request.

Keep — Per the disclaimer linked at the bottom on the webpage, "The information on National Weather Service (NWS) Web pages are in the public domain, unless specifically noted otherwise, and may be used without charge for any lawful purpose...The information on National Weather Service Web servers and Web sites is in the public domain, unless specifically annotated otherwise, and may be used freely by the public." On the Commons, the NWS disclaimer may be enough to keep the file. A recently closed deletion request for a file under the PD-NWS template was closed as keep with the main keep rational being the NWS general disclaimer. Public domain images can be used for any purpose and may be used commercially for profit, so arguments about it being sold are not valid in my view. Based on the NWS disclaimer and the recently closed DR I believe it should be kept. WeatherWriter (talk) 09:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete per @Rlandmann. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 18:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At least a local copy can be kept on En Wiki under fair use with credit to the author given that the author gave permission for "educational purposes". The permission might even go beyond just fair use, but would still not be compatible with Commons. Nakonana (talk) 19:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed that with practically any of the images under consideration here, en:Wikipedia could use the images under "fair use"; however just noting that the photographer agreeing that NWS's Pueblo office (and maybe the NWS more generally) could use the photo this way does not mean that they are licensing anybody else to use it the same way. --Rlandmann (talk) 20:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gardiner railway station - Melbourne.jpg

I decided to withdraw this nomination for deletion as per the latest response per COM:INUSE. The result of the image will be kept and won't be deleted. Instead, I'll hand this image to User:Georgfotoart to update the quality, contrast and colour

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This image does not have great contrast and colour. So I would nominate this file for deletion as "delete". PEPSI697 (talk) 09:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is currently the best image we have of the new Gardiner station. The image isn't even that bad really. Steelkamp (talk) 10:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point there. When I looked at the Gardiner station category on Wikimedia Commons last week, I could not find any other images of the rebuilt Gardiner station. PEPSI697 (talk) 11:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I took this photo on an iPhone 5S on an overcast day. I would say keep this photo up for now, just until someone wants to volunteer to take a better photo on a better day with better equipment. Or, of course, if I somehow find time in the near future to do so. Effluvium1 (talk) 08:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really specifically the weather that I find that it was the problem, just the contrast and colour. Also, I think you did an amazing job on updating railway station images in Melbourne back in January 2021 and Puffing Billy images in January 2022. I strongly encourage anyone on Wikimedia Commons or Wikipedia to upload their images of railway stations in Melbourne so it keeps up to date and update the info-box image depending when the image was taken. PEPSI697 (talk) 08:50, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep No valid reason for deletion. We don't delete images solely because of not having "great contrast and colour". Also COM:INUSE. S5A-0043^Talk 09:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by PEPSI697 (talk • contribs) 10:46, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infrared lamp

This is not a gallery page: with only one photo. In my opinion a gallery page has a lot of images and the purpose is "to present readers with a structured and meaningful collection of the media found here on Wikimedia Commons" (see Commons:Galleries). This gallery page does not meet these criteria. JopkeB (talk) 09:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jan Teevet.jpg

Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer or rights holder is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 10:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dr Mario logo.png

Above threshold of originality with some 3D elements in pixels. The way of Changpian (talk) 10:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:B XI B 18.23 001.jpg

perchè il titolo è errato e andrà modificato anche il file, da caricare in formato pdf IlariaCatanzaro (talk) 10:10, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Condivido la richiesta di cancellazione. Il documento sarà sostituito integralmente Lanfrancotti Ermindo (talk) 10:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Holy-DYVR (talk · contribs)

COM:PACKAGING with prominent artwork.

Belbury (talk) 10:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Twin tornadoes in Illinois on July 12, 2023.jpg

This photograph was taken by Bob Waszak in the United States in 2023. He published it on his X feed,[10] and in the comments that follow, we can see the license terms that he agreed to with the NWS:

@NWSChicago: Hi Bob! Thanks for the reports and photos. Would we be able to feature this image on a post-event webpage with appropriate attribution? Thanks!

@nilwxreports: absolutely, everything is free for you to use. Thanks!

This is a rare case where we can see exactly what the photographer agreed to, and it wasn't putting the image in the public domain.

This image was uploaded to Commons on the basis that it was the work of a US federal government employee performing their duties, but no evidence was provided for this. There is no claim that this image is ineligible for copyright for any other reason.

As a photo taken in the United States after 1989, copyright came into being as soon as it was made.

The uploader later revised the rationale to keep the image under the rationales expressed in the {{PD-NWS}} template at the time; that

when the weather.gov general disclaimer says that material not in the public domain will be specifically noted, it means that it must be published with a formal copyright notice. Whereas in reality, not only has the NWS never promised any specific form of notation, there is ample evidence to demonstrate this is not their general practice. This belief also chooses to ignore the words elsewhere in the disclaimer that state that third party images are used by the NWS under license, and to contact the third-party creators for re-use.
the words of a NWS Sioux City regional office policy that placed some public submissions in the public domain somehow applied to this image, although there is nothing to connect it with that office. (The photo was published by the Chicago office).

Without clearer evidence that Waszak intended to place this photo in the public domain, we need to delete this under COM:PRP. Rlandmann (talk) 10:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep — The image is found on this webpage of the National Weather Service.

Per the disclaimer linked at the bottom on the webpage, "The information on National Weather Service (NWS) Web pages are in the public domain, unless specifically noted otherwise, and may be used without charge for any lawful purpose...The information on National Weather Service Web servers and Web sites is in the public domain, unless specifically annotated otherwise, and may be used freely by the public."
On the Commons, the NWS disclaimer may be enough to keep the file. A recently closed deletion request for a file under the PD-NWS template was closed as keep with the main keep rational being the NWS general disclaimer.
In addition to the disclaimer, the bottom of the NWS webpage also states, “ Media use of NWS Web News Stories is encouraged! Please acknowledge the NWS as the source of any news information accessed from this site.”

Based on the NWS disclaimers and the recently closed DR I believe it should be kept. WeatherWriter (talk) 11:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per @Rlandmann. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 18:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:SZ 深圳 Shenzhen 羅湖 Luohu 老街 Laojie 中海商場 Zhong Hai Shopping mall 深圳戲院 Shenzhen Theater June 2023 Px3 03.jpg

Copyrighted screenshot in China. Solomon203 (talk) 10:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:SZ 深圳 Shenzhen 羅湖 Luohu 老街 Laojie 中海商場 Zhong Hai Shopping mall 深圳戲院 Shenzhen Theater June 2023 Px3 04.jpg

Copyrighted screenshot in China. Solomon203 (talk) 10:39, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:20180903 Jonas Sjöstedt Vänsterpartiet valgplakat 2018 (44395499572).jpg

COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 10:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:20180903 Katrin Stjernfeldt Jammeh Socialdemokraterna valgplakat 2018 (29507111557).jpg

COM:POSTERs are temporarily display, cannot benefit from FOP A1Cafel (talk) 10:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:20210928 Christiania pusher 164141 (51530833093).jpg

No FoP for 2D works in Denmark A1Cafel (talk) 10:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Andrei Svislotskiy.jpg

Poster for a short Russian film from 1991, unclear why it would be PD in the United States. Belbury (talk) 10:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Nazan Şoray.jpg

Please delete this file (G7 - Author requests deletion) or anonoymize the file (delete the comment I added in the initial version). 2001:1C00:E0A:FE00:F50B:61AD:481C:A35 03:46, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. Osx (talk) 03:55, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:INUSE. Is there any problem with the copyright, Osx? Did you shoot the photo? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:49, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: File in use and not eligible for G7. I have hidden some early file description history per request. --IronGargoyle (talk) 14:19, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nazan Şoray.jpg

As the photographer of this image, I kindly request that it be deleted. If deletion is not possible, please completely anonymize my authorship by removing the "User" and "Comment/yazar" fields from the File History section, the "Author" field from the Summary section, and any other fields that contain my username. Thank you very much. Osx (talk) 11:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Schönberg - 50Pf. ND.jpg

This German Notgeld (emergency money) bill from the 1920s is a work of Hugo Hagenkötter, who died in 1967. So it is not in the public domain in Germany yet, and the file should be deleted. It can be restored in 2038. Rosenzweig τ 11:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wat Lok Molee 7769.jpg

uploader request Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 11:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:SpaceX Galileo.webp

Appears to be a screenshot, definitely not own work Gbawden (talk) 11:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thanks will provide alternative own shot Ajokkera (talk) 14:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kinema-Junpo-1963-August-late-2.jpg

Screenshot of the movie, still copyrighted in Russia as the country of origin. Quick1984 (talk) 11:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Senator Harnisch.jpg

Not own work, may be free but needs more info Gbawden (talk) 11:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What info do you need? 2603:3003:3608:F900:890:4728:AA1F:7075 13:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source, date etc Gbawden (talk) 13:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source is the Tom Harnisch Papers donated to the Wisconsin Historical Society, and the date is from 1981. 108.48.174.252 01:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iloilo Capitol by User:Patrickroque01 (talk · contribs)

See Commons:Deletion requests/File:New Iloilo Prov Capitol.JPG, same reason. Local copies of images now restored (see this local undeletion request). These were apparently transferred to Commons by Merd123 (talk · contribs) (this and this) without thorough review of both the authorship and date of the architectural work and of the current status/version of the Philippine copyright law (which does not permit Freedom of Panorama or commercial exploitations of public art and architecture of the Philippines still under their designers' copyrights or posthumous copyrights). These can be undeleted if ever the Philippine legislature introduces FoP provision.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:49, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Thomas Cornelus Mister France.jpg

This picture is from a private source Danhay34 (talk) 10:23, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A search on Tineye and Google Lens doesn't reveal any usage before our upload here. We need more of an explanation than a single sentence claiming this is from a "private source." From Hill To Shore (talk) 23:57, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per From Hill to Shore. --Abzeronow (talk) 20:04, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Thomas Cornelus Mister France.jpg

The public release of this photo is disputed by the subject (ticket on info-fr file #2024042410010187). The file is used nowhere in Wikimedia project => useless for us JohnNewton8 (talk) 11:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your second sentence is not a deletion reason. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:59, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ramsingh Tola.png

en:Ramsingh Tola is deleted due to non-notability, the draft is deleted as well. In my opinion the logo is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 11:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tsalapitsak.jpg

Not useful picture, seems suitable for personal use Brunnaiz (talk) 12:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Human penis scrotum.jpg

Duplicated file EvinasEvii (talk) 12:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Phomolong Ladies FC logo.png

Out of scope and possibly copyvio. Jonteemil (talk) 12:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Jodel

Possibly above COM:TOO Germany.

Jonteemil (talk) 12:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Galaxy Racer GXR.png

Possibly above COM:TOO United Arab Emirates which doesn't exist. Jonteemil (talk) 12:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logo Trachtenchorfest 2016.PNG

Above COM:TOO Switzerland. Jonteemil (talk) 12:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:New Project 540x.webp

user is promoting masks (see other upload) and this is "original research" I think. -- Deadstar (msg) 12:51, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Isabel-Perello.jpg

The user is not the author of the image nor does the image have free copyright TheRichic (talk) 12:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Järvakas12 (talk · contribs)

File:Sten-võrk.png is not own work. I suspect that the other file is also not own work. Deletion per COM:PCP

Estopedist1 (talk) 13:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Aarepilv (talk · contribs)

Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer or rights holder is needed.

Estopedist1 (talk) 13:04, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Aarepilv (talk · contribs)

book covers. VRT-permission from the creator (illustrator) or rights holder is needed.

Estopedist1 (talk) 13:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Obvodny kahal Embankment at west from Novo-Kamenny bridge.jpg

Incorrect blurring part of historical images (by way, without attribution of changes be made)

This image was nominated for deletion, and then was kept after changes made by Jmabel.
In my opinion, this manner of handling historical photographs is fundamentally unacceptable. You may or may not accept such photos, but this is not acceptable to deface them by blurring part of the image in favor of a literal interpretation of ill-advised rules. Moreover, this is unacceptable to make such changes and not attribute them in the photo description.

Please restore original look or delete this photo. Kaganer (talk) 13:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Abzeronow, Quick1984, A1Cafel, Consigned, Myotus, and Ooligan: --Kaganer (talk) 13:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think this is perfectly acceptable, and not uncommon practice. Category:Gaussian blurs to avoid copyright infringement, plus I'll guess many more that have not been correctly categorized here. - Jmabel ! talk 16:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Thank you @Jmabel for taking some of your valuable time to do the gaussian blur work. Good work. __ Ooligan (talk) 21:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Descriptions can be changed, and original source is still available. The murals were not de minimis and consensus was to delete before I offered a solution that would keep the photo but obscure the copyrighted material that would have needed additional permissions.(EDIT: If Russia ever does introduce commercial FOP for artwork, the original version which is hidden can be restored.) Abzeronow (talk) 17:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Abzeronow for explaining that if a future Russian government changes Freedom of Panorama (FoP) Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Russia law, consistent the Commons policy, then this image and other similar images can be restored to the original version. If deleted, this photo may no longer be availble in the future or difficult to re-discover from an archival source. I believe this future restoration could include revision deletions (COM:REVDEL), where FoP was an issue. -- Ooligan (talk) 21:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While I disagree with the outcome of the decision (see my previous comments) and have an issue with how it was handled - rapidly executed and approved by a couple of people in about an hour.

I think it is time to move on. My only question is (which could not be raised due to the rapid change and approval process), why only blur out the human figures and not the whole murals? It seems to be a poor understanding of copyright and art. Myotus (talk) 17:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I blurred out the portions I believed were copyrightable. If someone thinks there are copyrightable elements remaining, feel free to blur more, but I think what remains is below COM:TOO. - Jmabel ! talk 17:36, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The approach I have seen so far is one of extreme caution, so I do not know of any reasons to be less than overly cautious now. Please blur all portions, there may be a litigious lawyer waiting in the wings. Myotus (talk) 18:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Myotus, have you tried reading replies to your previous comments? Where, for example, did you manage to get this: the copyright term in the Soviet Union is 25 years from the first publication of a work and the death of the creator? --Quick1984 (talk) 18:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, it is incomprehensible. Apparently English is my second language and I don't have a first language. I shouldn't write tired.

Its a mute point now but what I was trying to write was - minimum general copyright term in the Soviet Union is 25 years since the first publication or the lifetime of the creator plus 25 years after their death. Anyways again, apologies for the sloppy post. Myotus (talk) 23:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. For those who insisted this photo is useful without murals. --Quick1984 (talk) 18:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and

Comment to the closing admin: There's a typo in the file name, so it should be renamed to: "Obvodny kanal Embankment at west from Novo-Kamenny bridge.jpg". The Russian letter for "N" looks very similar to the Latin "H" that's why it's a frequent typo to use Latin "H" where a "N" should be. Here currently "kahal" instead of the correct "kanal" (Russian: канал — see the "н"?), i.e. "canal". I'm not placing the renaming template right now due to the deletion request. Nakonana (talk) 20:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Nakonana for your suggeted correction. -- Ooligan (talk) 21:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Mavran2 (talk · contribs)

Mavra does not exist, fantasy diagrams, out of project scope

Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 13:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Plan général de la ville (...)Corny E btv1b530366260 1 (1).jpg

Copyright concerns, if anyone can help with verifying if this is not under copyright law then we would strongly appreciate it Rafikmohhdzz (talk) 13:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep @Rafikmohhdzz: I'll delete this if you insist because you as the uploader requested it shortly after upload, but I don't think there is any reason for copyright concerns. This is a map from 1865, it should be out of copyright everywhere. --Rosenzweig τ 07:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay, I understand now. Sorry I'm still new to these things and I am trying to learn more about them. I must say that there's no reason for deletion then. Thank you Rafikmohhdzz (talk) 14:08, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment No copyright concerns (in France or U.S.) for map published in 1865. Could be deleted in favor of the higher resolution version previously uploaded as File:Plan général de la ville d'Alger comprenant les nouveaux projets des rues, places etc... . à l'échelle de Om. 001 pour 4 mètres (=1 - 4 000 ). E. Corny grav. - btv1b530366260.jpg, but this version could also remain in case the lower resolution version is desirable. —Tcr25 (talk) 12:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I wouldn't mind having both versions stay in WikiMedia commons. Thank you for your information regarding the higher resolution version. Have a nice day, both of you Rafikmohhdzz (talk) 14:10, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Isay-hermann-exlibris.jpg

There is not enough information here to determine the copyright status of this drawing. We're not given a year in which the drawing was created. There is a named artist, Elly (or Emy?) Plehwe (apparently a woman), but we don't know when she died, and I couldn't find anything about her. The only way we could keep the image is if we knew that the image was at least 120 years old (for {{PD-old-assumed}}), but we don't know that either, and since this is an exlibris drawing for a man who lived 1873–1938, there is a very good chance that the drawing is not old enough. The file should therefore be deleted unless the drawing is convincingly shown to be in the public domain (in both Germany and the US) or at least 120 years old. Rosenzweig τ 13:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found an ex libris author for Hermann Isay but the name doesn't match. The author would be Maria Ressel (1877-1945). See https://www.exlibris.or.at/?page_id=435 (where an ex libris for Hermann Isay is listed among her works, but unfortunately there's no image of it). More on Ressel: https://www.exlibris.or.at/?page_id=432. Not sure whether this is enough to link the two, but Isay sounds like a rather unusual name, so how are the chances to have two Hermann Isays in the German speaking area around the same time frame who both have an ex libris? The ex libris is approximately dated to 1928 according to https://portal.dnb.de/opac.htm?method=simpleSearch&cqlMode=true&query=nid%3D1163040487 and to https://explore.gnd.network/gnd/1163040487 Nakonana (talk) 21:02, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your research. The 1928 date means it would be in the public domain in the United States. It does not help with German copyright though, where works are protected for 70 years after the death of the artist. The exlibris for Isay you found on the page about Maria Ressel is listed as an Entwurf (draft), which suggests that Isay did not use it. Also, according to the images there, Maria Ressel signed her works as RESSEL, M. Ressel or M. R. The signature we have here does not come even remotely close to those, instead it obviously says Elly Plehwe or perhaps Emy Plehwe. So I don't think Maria Ressel did the exlibris we have here. And Ressel's exlibris for Hermann Isay being just a draft probably means that it is the same Hermann Isay we're talking about who did not Ressel's exlibris draft, but went with this exlibris from someone else. --Rosenzweig τ 07:25, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do we do about the fact that https://explore.gnd.network/gnd/1163040487 — which appears to be linked to the archive that catalogued that exlibris in the first place — is listing Hermann Isay himself as the "Urheber" (i.e.author of the exlibris)? Nakonana (talk) 12:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing. That other sites have peculiar notions about what and who exactly an author is does not affect us. Isay probably commissioned the drawing, he may have acquired exclusive usage rights, and any heirs of his might even have inherited them. But all that did not make him the author, and the copyright term (the duration) is tied to the person of the author. --Rosenzweig τ 13:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Omelia detta nella metropolitana di Urbino.jpg

perchè il titolo è errato e andrà modificato anche il file, da caricare in formato pdf IlariaCatanzaro (talk) 13:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confermo la richiesta di cancellazione. Il file sarà sostituito con il documento integrale Lanfrancotti Ermindo (talk) 14:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Uploading a full PDF does not necessitate deleting a JPG of the cover. If there is an issue with the file name or information that should be corrected, but a JPG may be used/needed in places where a PDF can't be used. —Tcr25 (talk) 12:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Per la traslazione della santa casa di Loreto.jpg

perchè il titolo è errato e andrà modificato anche il file, da caricare in formato pdf IlariaCatanzaro (talk) 13:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confermo la richiesta di cancellazione. Il file sarà sostituito con il documento integrale Lanfrancotti Ermindo (talk) 14:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Some people may just want to have the jpg of the title page. --RAN (talk) 20:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Uploading a full PDF does not necessitate deleting a JPG of the cover. If there is an issue with the file name or information that should be corrected, but (as RAN notes) a JPG may be used/needed in places where a PDF can't be used. —Tcr25 (talk) 12:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Senator Morgan LaMantia Official Headshot 2023.jpg

No exif, found on the web, unlikely to be own work, needs VRT Gbawden (talk) 13:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:SenRyanFazio.jpg

I can't find any proof that this is PD Gov. Taken from the state's republican party page, needs VRT Gbawden (talk) 14:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Surf Town Ink.jpg

Logo without educational value, out of scope. Only used in abandoned sandbox page of non-contributing user. P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:07, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:CHX.jpg

Personal photo, out of scope. Only used in userpage of non-contributing user. And likely not own work, watermark not matching uploader. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:12, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Farm transport in Uganda.jpg

Unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 14:14, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:SKIN THE PEELER.jpg

1994 photo, not 2024 own work, needs VRT to keep Gbawden (talk) 14:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With reference to your deletion request. I am in the process of writing an article regarding the musical band Skin the Peeler, which were current in the 80's and 90's. (at present the article is in the Sandbox stage) I am the owner of this image which was taken in 1994. It is part of my collection. Ceri Aber (talk) 19:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you follow the process at COM:VRT Gbawden (talk) 05:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Raffaella Carrà 2.jpg

The uploader did not provide any date of production and on itwiki this photo is dated 1980s. Images created after 1976 or published after 1978 are PD in Italy but not in the US as per URAA restoration. Arrow303 (talk) 14:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Michiru Yamane at house.jpg

No real proof of free-use given. The image is taken from her YouTube account. Dissident93 (talk) 14:36, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:RS-PHOTO.jpg

personal photo as test? not used not in scope Avron (talk) 15:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Taylor 49 (talk) 18:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Manshi pavansing (talk · contribs)

Logos and business documents used only for attempted promotion of a non-notable organization (w:en:User:Manshi pavansing). Outside of COM:SCOPE.

Marbletan (talk) 15:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dr Mohammad Esfahni (56).jpg

Check Lens (ver su propia página de internet) pf. 200.39.139.7 15:39, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following license:

	This file is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication.
	The person who associated a work with this deed has dedicated the work to the public domain by waiving all of their rights to the work worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law. You can copy, modify, distribute and perform the work, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. CC0falsefalse

Moh14 (talk) 21:07, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Amen break notation.svg

This file was initially tagged by MIDI as fair use and the most recent rationale was: Transcription of a copyrighted composition. Propose re-upload to appropriate projects with (for example) Wikipedia:Template:Non-free sheet music Quick1984 (talk) 15:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by ArthurHabirov (talk · contribs)

COM:SPAM, self promotional images; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 15:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:KaraMahmudNationalGalleryTirana.jpg

Grabbed from http://www.albanianart.net/painting/rrota/ – but this is not really the issue. The painter Simon Rota died in 1961, so image probably still copyright protected Albinfo (talk) 16:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:منتزه مدينة المحمدية - Mohammedia City Park.jpg

Watermark, You have uploaded a correct copy. Mounir Neddi (talk) 16:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ismet Toto posing with some rebels.webp

license bogus and without proper source or proper description not of any educational value for this project Albinfo (talk) 16:10, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep license now fixes to PD-EU, and "[no] educational value", I disagree. It is the only image we have of Ismet Toto (1908-1937). --RAN (talk) 02:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So Ismet Toto is supposed to be one of the 23 persons on the image. Which person? Without this information, the picture has no educational value.

No website that shows this image ([11], [12]) mentions Ismet Toto – who tells me that this person is really on this image?

Still no proper source: Who scanned it where? If this is a scan of the original image, we should have the archive mentioned. And then we would also have a description for this image and not just a random text somebody made up. Albinfo (talk) 19:42, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like he's in the center of the image — the guy with the mustache who's not wearing a uniform. Compare with sq:Skeda:U1 IsmetToto.jpg. Nakonana (talk) 22:50, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pokéball e Charmeleon (20240901).jpg

Violation of COM:TOYS. Copyrighted character. (Oinkers42) (talk) 16:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why does a Charmeleon figure violate copyright but costumes don't? Mark Gasoline (talk) 18:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please read COM:COSTUME and COM:TOYS to understand. (Oinkers42) (talk) 21:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pride Unicorn Allies.jpg

Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 16:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rwanda Kingdom in "1896".jpg

This file is of poor visual quality (unclear/blurry), and a clearer, higher-quality version of the same subject has already been uploaded. The new version better serves the purposes of Wikimedia Commons and its users. Adygrafix250 (talk) 16:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Adygrafix250: When claiming dupe, please reveal of what. Taylor 49 (talk) 18:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? Adygrafix250 (talk) 11:14, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had another photo looking good than this Adygrafix250 (talk) 07:07, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide the filename of said better image. --Túrelio (talk) 13:27, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Territoires de Ruanda Urundi 1.jpg

This file is of poor visual quality (unclear/blurry), and a clearer, higher-quality version of the same subject has already been uploaded. The new version better serves the purposes of Wikimedia Commons and its users. Adygrafix250 (talk) 16:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ig-Oge Okoye.ogg

Duplication Iwuala Lucy (talk) 16:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:LL-Q33578 (ibo)-Sylvaline39-Oge Okoye.wav

Duplication Iwuala Lucy (talk) 16:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ig-Oluchi Onweagba-Orlandi.ogg

Duplication Iwuala Lucy (talk) 16:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ig-Oluchi Onweagba.ogg

Duplication Iwuala Lucy (talk) 16:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demirkapı Tüneli - 31.08.2024 11.jpg

Original uploader’s request bluetime93 💬 16:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Charlie Puth and Justin Bieber.jpg

As per Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Nokia621 Brunnaiz (talk) 16:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:LL-Q33578 (ibo)-Sylvaline39-Pete Edochie.wav

Duplication Iwuala Lucy (talk) 16:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Iwuala Lucy: When claiming dupe, please reveal of what. Taylor 49 (talk) 18:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Taylor 49duly noted Iwuala Lucy (talk) 19:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demirkapı Tüneli - 31.08.2024 10.jpg

Original uploader’s request bluetime93 💬 16:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demirkapı Tüneli - 31.08.2024 9.jpg

Original uploader’s request bluetime93 💬 16:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demirkapı Tüneli - 31.08.2024 8.jpg

Original uploader’s request bluetime93 💬 16:35, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demirkapı Tüneli - 31.08.2024 7.jpg

Original uploader’s request bluetime93 💬 16:35, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demirkapı Tüneli - 31.08.2024 6.jpg

Original uploader’s request bluetime93 💬 16:35, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demirkapı Tüneli - 31.08.2024 5.jpg

Original uploader’s request bluetime93 💬 16:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demirkapı Tüneli - 31.08.2024 4.jpg

Original uploader’s request bluetime93 💬 16:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ig-Sullivan Iheanacho Chime.ogg

Duplication Iwuala Lucy (talk) 16:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This audio file was created and uploaded using the spell for wiki app by me in 2022, i see no reason behind the nomination for its deletion and also i would if its possibe to know who put it up for deletion so i could get a better explanation.

Thank you Dagentle (talk) 12:42, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demirkapı Tüneli - 31.08.2024 3.jpg

Original uploader’s request bluetime93 💬 16:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demirkapı Tüneli - 31.08.2024 2.jpg

Original uploader’s request bluetime93 💬 16:38, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demirkapı Tüneli - 31.08.2024.jpg

Original uploader’s request bluetime93 💬 16:39, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ig-uche ogbodo.ogg

Duplication Iwuala Lucy (talk) 16:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ig-Uche ogbodo.ogg

Duplication Iwuala Lucy (talk) 16:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ig-Yul Edochie.ogg

Duplication Iwuala Lucy (talk) 16:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Memorial plaque mentioning return of Swami Vivekananda at Old Budge Budge railway station.jpg

The text could be copyrighted. Sreejith K (talk) 16:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Looks like the text is in Bangla and this is a rough translation as per Google. Pujyapad Swami Vivekananda, the returnee of the Chicago Dharma Conference, set out for Calcutta on February 19, 1897, from Bajabaj railway station. In his memory in the presence of Shri Hrishikesh Banerjee, General Manager of Eastern Railway. Swami Lokeswarananda, Vice-Chancellor, Ramakrishna Mission Institute of Culture Golpark, Calcutta. laid the foundation stone of this memorial. Established by the Vivekananda Memorial Committee at the initiative of Shri Ganesh Ghosh Vice Chairman, Bajaj Municipality. 19th February 1986 --Sreejith K (talk) 14:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tatarstan Boeing 737-500 Rubin.jpg

low-res copy of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tatarstan_Airlines_Boeing_737-500_Rubin_Karakas-1.jpg Bestalex (talk) 16:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:ZU Abu Dhabi Campus.jpeg

No FoP in UAE, structure in the centre of the image built after 1993. Abzeronow (talk) 17:10, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Maumoon Abdul Gayyoom presidential portrait.jpg

None of the criteria in the stated licence seem to apply Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:TR06 Sektion in Lathen.jpg

Das Foto hätte nicht veröffentlicht werden dürfen, da der TR06 auf einem nicht für die Öffentlichkeit zugänglichen Bereich eingelagert wurde. Das Bild gibt Anreiz dieses Fahrzeug aufzusuchen und die Vergangenheit hat gezeigt, dass dadurch das Fahrzeug nur noch weiter beschädigt wird. Dhanutar (talk) 18:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ist es ein ausreichender Löschgrund, das Fahrzeug vor weiterem Aufsuchen zu schützen? Zumal es im Artikel Transrapid 06 einen Beleg zu dem Fahrzeug gibt, wonach es mit Foto als eingelagerter TR06 im Emsland abgebildet ist. Eine Abbildung von dem Fahrzeug existiert im Internet und es ist daher kein Geheimnis.

Eine andere Frage ist, ob das Foto in einem nicht öffentlichen Bereich (wenn es denn einer ist) hätte aufgenommen werden dürfen und veröffentlicht werden dürfen. Laut Recht am Bild der eigenen Sache hätte der Fotograf beim Betreten eines nichtöffentlich zugänglichen (Privat-)Grundstücks für die Verwertung die Einwilligung des Eigentümers bzw. Rechteinhabers einholen müssen. Da ist die Frage ob dies zu einer Löschung führt oder ob User:Dhanutar berechtigt ist, die Löschung zu verlangen, weil er z.B Besitzer des Fahrzeugs ist oder Grundstückseigentümer. --AxelHH (talk) 17:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Das Fahrzeug ist auf einem Grundstück eingelagert, was einer externen Firma gehört. Durch die Bekanntgabe des Standortes auf Google Maps (mittlerweile auch entfernt) wurde das Fahrzeug öfter aufgesucht, es wurde Hausfriedensbruch begangen (da das Gelände nur mit der Genehmigung des Eigentümers betreten werden darf) und dadurch kam es auch häufig zu Vandalismus am Fahrzeug.

Das Fahrzeug ist im Besitz des Vereins und dem liegt es sehr am Herzen, dass dieses Fahrzeug so lange nicht zu sehen ist, bis es wieder in einem präsentablem zustand ist.

Die angegebene Quelle für das eingelagerte Fahrzeug in Lathen kommt von der gleichen Person, wie das hier bemängelte Foto und auch da besteht das gleiche Problem. Dhanutar (talk) 19:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Der Urheber ist übrigens euer eigener Beauftragter für Öffentlichkeitsarbeit (vgl. https://fv-transrapid.de/ueber-uns/). Und auf Google Maps und Apple Maps ist das Fahrzeug nach wie vor aufzufinden (vgl. https://www.google.com/maps/@52.8667416,7.3357125,18z/data=!3m1!1e3). Ankermast (talk) 07:38, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dann ist das Bild von einem Berechtigten aufgenommen worden, der bestimmen kann, ob es (in wikipedia) veröffentlicht wird. Ein ähnliches Bild als eingelagerter TR06 im Emsland ist ja im Internet veröffentlicht. --AxelHH (talk) 16:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ebensowenig befindet sich die Sektion in eurem Besitz; sie gehört der Gemeinde Lathen. --Ankermast (talk) 05:21, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Beuys land a4 quer.png

copyvio . protected art derrivate - https://www.gerdludwig.com/news/2024/4/beuyslandrelease Peli (talk) 18:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Terous132 (talk · contribs)

Likely not own works: low-res/web-sized images with FB/transmission code in EXIF data.

P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:THPT CHV Phú Thọ.png

Not own logo, above COM:TOO. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Àmbit 2 Palau Robert Jugo com una nena (cropped).jpg

Likely copyrighted artworks. Ooligan (talk) 19:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Steve Reeves e Gordon Scott in Romolo e Remo.jpg

Screenshot from the movie Duel of the Titans". The film was registered in the US copyright office in 1963 with record LP25370 [13] and it was renewed in 1990 with record RE0000477904 [14]. Günther Frager (talk) 19:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Àmbit 2 Palau Robert Jugo com una nena.jpg

Likely copyrighted artworks. Ooligan (talk) 19:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy and obvious keep There is very little artwork, and the exhibition was created by a council that makes everything available under Commons. There is basic text, and one mid-prominent photo of artwork that is COM:FOP (and has its own category here on Commons, a category the file is in). There are some DEMINIMIS photos on the back wall which are so not prominent I was wondering what in the composition you were challenging as potentially copyrighted. And (again) besides the lack of prominence, if the photos are legitimately used in the exhibit then the Catalan government has the rights, and they publish everything Commons compliant. Ask or do research before asserting things "likely" are copyrighted when even just checking the links on the file page shows otherwise. Kingsif (talk) 21:45, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Berit-Saar.jpg

Person in the picture does not want to have this picture related to her name and kindly asks to delete this picture from Wikipedia database. Eesti.meister (talk) 19:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Affiche du spectacle Love et du Mirage.JPG

There is no freedom of panorama in the US. Günther Frager (talk) 19:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it is an illegal image, so be it. But it was displaid for all to see and the show and the hotel do not exist anymore. I don't know who could be hurt by having my picture appear in this encyclopedia. It will be sad to loose it. My opinion is to wait until an official party ask it's removal. JeanPaulGRingault (talk) 20:58, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Queen sheratonhotel bsas.jpg

File:Queen sheratonhotel bsas - restored.jpg

Photo published in the Argentine newspaper Clarín in 1981. It is currently in the public domain (20 years after publication + 25 years of creation), but it was not in 1996 at URAA time. Thus, it is still copyrighted in the US. Following COM:PCP we cannot keep it. Günther Frager (talk) 20:06, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but nobody cares about US copyright. It can be used in Europe and other parts of the world, so I would leave it. There are many images on Wikipedia that cannot be used in Europe or elsewhere, for example this one: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Queen_A_Night_At_The_Opera_(1975_Elektra_publicity_photo_02).jpg Matysek2000 (talk) 14:09, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but nobody cares about US copyright. Please read the licensing policy. Günther Frager (talk) 14:15, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dein Ziel Unterfuehrer im Betrieb Dein Weg Das Deutsche Leistungsertuechtigungsmerk der DAF.jpg

The author of this work is not unknown as claimed; per his signature, it's German artist de:René Ahrlé. Ahrlé died in 1976, so his works are not in the public domain in Germany yet, and the file should be deleted. It can be restored in 2047. Rosenzweig τ 20:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My bad : I must have missed the signature when uploading. Buidhe (talk) 20:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In front of the article https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232228093_Diversification_and_conservation_of_the_extraembryonic_tissues_in_mediating_nutrient_uptake_during_amniote_development you will find: License CC-BY 2.5.Rasbak (talk) 21:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Argentine youth team photos

Out of scope. Neither notable team nor players. Not in use in any article as well.

Files affected:

Fma12 (talk) 22:44, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]