Commons:Deletion requests/2024/08/24

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
23 August 2024
25 August 2024
Deletion requests on 24 August 2024

August 24

[edit]

Files uploaded by AlaskaGal (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Incorrect licenses, neither {{Attribution}} nor {{CC-zero}} apply as website has "copyright undetermined". Photograph is by Gordon Dean in the Valley Times Collection, but searching on Newspapers.com for the photo in the Valley Times in that year doesn't show it being published.

reppoptalk 00:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • They concluded "copyright Undetermined" which matches our "no known copyright restrictions" that we accept from Flickr Commons. --RAN (talk) 07:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've never heard that, the Rights Statements website states that "copyright undetermined" has the organization being "unable to make a conclusive determination as to the copyright status of the item" while it has "no known copyright restrictions" as them believing that it's "not restricted by copyright or related rights, but a conclusive determination could not be made", which seems pretty different. Plus, as I said, I don't see that it was published within the Valley Times. reppoptalk 19:52, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Senator Raff Ciccone Nov 2021.png

[edit]

The uploader has not provided evidence that they are the copyright holder. A version of this image appears on the Labor Party website, which specifies "This work is copyright" with no Creative Commons licence Neegzistuoja (talk) 00:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Senator David Fawcett.jpg

[edit]

The website senatorfawcett.com.au, as far as I could see, does not specify any Creative Commons licence Neegzistuoja (talk) 00:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lambie 2017.png

[edit]

Uploader has not provided evidence that they are the copyright holder. Image is high-quality, and the uploader has only ever uploaded 3 files (all versions of the same photo), suggesting it may have been taken from a professional copyrighted source Neegzistuoja (talk) 00:13, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:McLachlan Profile.jpg

[edit]

Uploader has not provided evidence that they are the copyright holder. Image is high-quality, and the uploader has not uploaded any other files, suggesting it may have been taken from a professional copyrighted source Neegzistuoja (talk) 00:15, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:SeN Helen Polley.jpg

[edit]

Uploader has not provided evidence that they are the copyright holder. Image is high-quality, and the uploader has not uploaded any other files, suggesting it may have been taken from a professional copyrighted source Neegzistuoja (talk) 00:16, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lustania flag.png

[edit]

The file isn't used in any Wiki project, and came from a series of (let's say) bizarre hoax websites about the supposed existence of a "Lusitanian" ethnic group still living in modern-day Portugal. ~Gum (talk) 00:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Senadores Socialistas - Camilo Escalona Medina - Raúl Angelo Salazar Jil - Lilian Silva Concejal.jpg

[edit]

existen terceros sin confirmar, se debe modificar titulo. Raulsjil (talk) 01:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Senadores Socialistas - Camilo Escalona Medina - Raúl Angelo Salazar Jil - Lilian Silva Concejal.jpg

[edit]

Se debe corregir titulo 2803:C600:6103:CA34:6866:E6C:56D0:F629 16:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Julie Dee Bell (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope: additional personal drawings. (See also: Commons:Deletion requests/File:God Centric.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:God calculation for time travel machines.jpg.)

Omphalographer (talk) 02:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Catherine de Foix, Queen of Navarre.jpg

[edit]

Re-upload of previously deleted image, problematic source, see Commons:Deletion_requests/File:CatherineofNavarre.jpg Eric talk 03:22, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:2020augderecho-aqua-crops-animated.gif

[edit]

This image clearly and explicitly includes imagery from Google Earth.

Google Earth's terms state: "Google Earth content may not be used for any commercial or promotional purposes."[1]

We have no evidence that Google has transferred their rights into the Public Domain. Rlandmann (talk) 04:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Closing admins should familiarise themselves with the evidence and discussions at this RfC when closing this request.
  • Comments/Questions: Per the image, this came from NASA Aqua satellite MODIS satellite. Wouldn't {{PD-NASA}} apply? Also, this is on a National Weather Service webpage. What is the protocol for a third-party company (Google) using a NASA satellite, which is then used by the U.S. government? WeatherWriter (talk) 04:20, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Beyond significant doubt, the unedited satellite photo belongs to NASA and is in the PD.
    But, that's not what we've got here. my understanding is that the Space Science and Engineering Center at University of Wisconsin-Madison processes it so that third parties (in this case, the NWS) can wrap that image (like a "skin") onto Google's model of the planet to create images like this.
    That is, the NWS has generated the image inside Google Earth, which Google's ToS clearly allow them to do (not commerical or promotional), but that permission does not release the resulting image under a free license or place it in the PD. --Rlandmann (talk) 04:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think the real question is not related to the Google ToS. The real question is whether it is actually out of PD. This is a rare instance where we have confirmation it was originally taken by NASA and in the PD. What did Google do? There was several discussions (when {{PD-NEXRAD}} was brought up and looked at on the copyright village pump discussion board several months ago), that PD images can be copyrighted. However, for it to be copyrighted, there has to be significant changes. If Google slapped their logo on it, it wouldn’t be significant changes, and would still be under the NASA copyright rules. This one isn’t super cut and dry in my opinion. I see your argument, but this also more or less seems like Google slapping a logo on a PD image. The copyright village pump dealt with that for PD-NEXRAD, where sometimes a logo was on a radar image. Those were determined to be PD at the village pump as it wasn’t significant changes. I have a feeling this gif is the exact same. WeatherWriter (talk) 06:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Google's contributions here likely fall into two categories: the 3D model that the PD image was wrapped around (and its rendering) and any map elements added by Google. The US doesn't recognise the "sweat of the brow" doctrine that exists in other copyright jurisdictions, so these are relevant only if copyright arises from one or both of those things, not just from Google doing the work.
    On the 3D model element, I agree that a key consideration here is that if the result of the process is no different from viewing the raw satellite image, then the resulting image is also in the PD. If we could figure out how to access the raw Aqua imagery, that would settle that question.
    As to the map elements, they are definitely copyrightable, if added by Google. When I turn on "Roads" in the "Layers" menu in the current Google Earth interface, I get a view very similar to the road network visible in this image (close enough to attribute the difference to UI changes over the intervening 4 years, and viewing on a different platform). This makes me very sure that the map elements belong to Google. --Rlandmann (talk) 09:07, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment This is the same understanding which left me to upload it and I did not notice the tiny copyright bit in the corner which referred to Google. Truly this NWS examination of images has resulted in incredible filth in terms of how complex things are. ~Gwennie🐈｟💬 📋｠ 23:02, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't understand what you mean by "filth" here? --Rlandmann (talk) 22:16, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Neutral Based on the consideration of Rlandmann and WeatherWriter’s arguments. ChessEric (talk) 05:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete on the grounds that Google does NOT release stuff like that into the public domain. Very strongly recommend deleting on PRP grounds. 🌀 Hurricane Clyde 🌀 (talk) 22:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Free version using the same imagery
Amazing! Thank you! We currently have two other files with similar issues; I'll ask you on your talk page if you can help with them too please :) --Rlandmann (talk) 22:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


File:Ganesh GD.jpg

[edit]

Self promotion and personal photo Saiphani02 (talk) 04:21, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Thomas Paine commemorative issue of The Truth Seeker published January 2015.jpg

[edit]

Magazine cover from 2015 and no evidence it is uploader's own work; COM:PCP because it is likely copyrighted RA0808 (talk) 04:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


File:Events Research Pilot at the World Snooker Championships (51150141790).jpg

[edit]

No FoP for "graphic works" in the United Kingdom A1Cafel (talk) 04:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Hi! Just to confirm, this is an image released by the UK Government, would that not count as being released by the copyright holder (as its a government building). Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:08, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hossam-al-Dawla-(clueless)-1984.jpg

[edit]

عکس دارای «حق تکثیر» است و برچسب «کریتیو کامنز » را سهوا یا (عمدا برای جلوگیری از پاک شدن) بدان افزوده‌اند. Tisfoon (talk) 04:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Typhoon Yogen nearing china 6-14-2023.jpg

[edit]

This is a grainy derivative of File:Typhoon Chanthu at peak intensity (07-22-10).jpg intended for the since-deleted hoax draft w:en:Draft:Typhoon Yogen. The title and description are misleading. Jasper Deng (talk|meta) 04:53, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hurricane Ernesto on 18th August 2024.jpg

[edit]

Satellite images are copyrighted, and very unlikely to be uploader's work A1Cafel (talk) 04:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Abbasian 1372 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

used for spam on various wikis by علی مرادی 35

--Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 05:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete. HeminKurdistan (talk) 08:34, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
برای اینکه از عکس های بم=نده سسو استفاده میشد شخصا خودم اقدام به آپلود کردم اگر احساس میکنید کار محربی است حذف کنید اما جلوی سو استفاده را هم بگیرید Abbasian 1372 (talk) 20:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dinh Bac in 2024.png

[edit]

Dubious own-work claim. Low resolution, no metadata, looks like a screenshot from an unattributed video. ✗plicit 05:17, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by TuanDungMTA (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Dubious own-work claims. Low resolution, no metadata, looks like screenshots from unattributed videos.

✗plicit 05:25, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Карта Степного похода.jpg

[edit]

Bogus PD rationale (70pma for an unknown author), no evidence of PD - just because a map reflects the realities of 1918 does not mean it was created in 1918. Quick1984 (talk) 06:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Newspaper of Rostselmash

[edit]

Copyrighted newspaper, works of several authors, no grounds to be considered PD.

Quick1984 (talk) 06:28, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ameerah Wardatul Bolkiah at coronation of 17th Yang di-Pertuan Agong of Malaysia, Sultan Ibrahim Iskandar.jpg

[edit]

no evidence that the image is free from copyright? DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kamensk-Oblast.jpg

[edit]

No information what edition this is, no evidence of PD. Quick1984 (talk) 06:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Новое кладбище Новочеркасска (4).jpg

[edit]

Derivative of a copyrighted photo, no FoP in Russia except architecture. Quick1984 (talk) 06:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:EvaLawler2023.jpg

[edit]

copyvio - unlikely to be own work (in a previous deletion request for this uploader i see they say they just use google for images) TheLoyalOrder (talk) 06:54, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

disregard google comment i misread what they were saying, still not sure this is own work but possibleTheLoyalOrder (talk) 07:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries if there's a misunderstanding, but can promise you it is my own work Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk) 07:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
if deleted please delete cropped version as well TheLoyalOrder (talk) 07:01, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
what are you talking about????
It is my work, you cannot find it elsewhere online because I took the photo
Not sure where I said that I "just use google for images" either? The main things I upload are candidate photos and only ones that comply with copyright as well, plus logos but they're non-free and not uploaded to commons
Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk) 07:15, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep as I found no hits from Google Lens or TinEye. The image appears to have been cropped and therefore lost its metadata. It would be better if @Totallynotarandomalt69 can upload a new version of with full EXIF metadata attached. --0x0a (talk) 08:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Totallynotarandomalt69: if you don't mind, please use this Commons:Wikimedia VRT release generator so that this deletion request can be closed without any misunderstanding. Thank you! // sikander { talk } 🦖 02:49, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for the late reply! I'll do that in a few hours when I get a moment Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk) 03:39, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The only thing is I'd really rather stay anonymous and this does require me giving out my name; I know there's a trusted volunteer team but it does even say that "Users should be careful of revealing personally-identifying information of subjects or creators, particularly names, physical addresses, and emails."
Would I be able to just upload the full original version with metadata instead and we can close this request based on that? Totallynotarandomalt69 (talk) 03:42, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Totallynotarandomalt69: I think either will be fine and you can probably tell the VRT team that you want to use a nickname instead of full name. Regards. // sikander { talk } 🦖 21:07, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mahathir Mohamad and Mike Pompeo.jpg

[edit]

Scaled-down dupe of File:Secretary Pompeo and Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad (43814325601).jpg A1Cafel (talk) 08:16, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree to delete, before today I don't the image already have😢 Baginda 480 (talk) 13:09, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Laurikainen (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Three images of one gent, two pictures of another and one picture of a third. None are own work.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:41, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted, real source and real author is needed. Taivo (talk) 20:20, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Laurikainen (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Historical documents, newspapers, coats of arms, illustration. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:24, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:53, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Laurikainen (talk · contribs)

[edit]

The user keeps uploading files copied from the internet as Creative Commons own work. Even though many of the files could be PD if licensed correctly, this behaviour is showing clear disregard of Commons' copyright policies, as this behaviour has kept on going for years now as shown by the user's talk page. The user has block history on fi-wiki, and a block here on Commons would not be out of the question in my opinion.

Onsilla (talk) 15:22, 21 January 2023 (UTC) c Keep The following are PD-Art:[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:10, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Laurikainen (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Probably not own work; might be public domain.

Antti T. Leppänen (talk) 08:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many of these are signatures of people who died more than 70 years ago and can simply have their license corrected (PD-signature, PD-old, etc.). I've gone through and corrected some of them; will aim to go through the full set. —Tcr25 (talk) 15:59, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep All the signatures have been corrected, along with the scans of book/report title pages, and the portrait of Rotkirch. (I've indicated these above.) The crests and a few others, I'm less certain of. —Tcr25 (talk) 16:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep The coat of arms come from a public domain book of Swedish nobility. --RAN (talk) 01:46, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Registered nurse philadelphia 1952 common history.jpg

[edit]

I am requesting the deletion of this file because I originally uploaded it using the "BillCramer" account. To ensure proper attribution and avoid duplication, I would like to re-upload the file under the "CommonHistory" account. Therefore, I request the deletion of this image from this account to manage it correctly under the new account. BillCramer (talk) 09:00, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Հայաստան դաշինք.png

[edit]

I uploaded the image. Now there is a widely used version in the Wiki commons POitor talk 09:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Taris, roi de l'eau (1931) par Jean Vigo.webm

[edit]

This film was directed by Jean Vigo (1905–1934). It's still under copyright in the U.S., since the URAA restoration date was within 70 years of the director's death. A notice of intent to enforce was filed in 1996 for all of Vigo's films made under Gaumont, including this one. hinnk (talk) 09:03, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Before 1996, the law was 50 years + extension. Therefore this film is not affected by the URAA, as the director died in 1934, and the film was in the public domain in 1995. See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:À propos de Nice (1930) par Jean Vigo.webm. Yann (talk) 10:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Based on Carl Lindberg's response in that discussion, I think it's safe to say that author's rights for Vigo expired before the URAA restoration date. Vigo also was the sole writer and director on this, but unlike À propos de Nice, Taris appears to include original music and the composer isn't listed. Unless the author of the music died also within ~4 years of the film's release, there's a very good chance Gaumont's notice is valid. hinnk (talk) 21:50, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep. Per Yann. Relevant criteria. Tisourcier (talk) 15:55, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Josbel1980 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

per COMːTOYS

Gbawden (talk) 09:37, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by De Crescenzo Gennaro (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Possible copyvio: The model is marked as the author

CoffeeEngineer (talk) 13:21, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, missing permission. --Wdwd (talk) 11:53, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by De Crescenzo Gennaro (talk · contribs)

[edit]

{{No permission since|month=August|day=24|year=2024}}

CoffeeEngineer (talk) 09:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:مسجد المورق.jpg

[edit]

repeated photo of File:مسجد قرية المورق.jpg أمين (talk) 11:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mirosmajdabio.jpg

[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Sahaib as no permission (No permission) Krd 12:19, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Republican Party of Georgia.jpg

[edit]

Photo of copyrighted logo. Copyvio. Jonteemil (talk) 12:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, then I will submit the entire photo instead of the cutout. Labrang (talk) 16:32, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, as long as it's permitted per COM:FOP Georgia. Jonteemil (talk) 20:22, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Before I upload it and lose any rights to withdraw it from commons, this is the [entire shot]. I had in my mind it was with wider context. I can understand this may not be enough for FOP. However, let me connect this with this file: File:Republican Party of Georgia logo.png. That nomination seems unreasonable, given the simple figure/text logo compared to others that have been accepted for long - as stated at that nomination page. So my proposal would be: delete this photo here, and leave the PNG logo on commons. Labrang (talk) 15:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the logo in the linked shot is de minimis, and I think there's very little chance it would be kept in a deletion request on this site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:37, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The logo was deemed non-free, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Republican Party of Georgia logo.png. Jonteemil (talk) 18:24, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kalamazoo-tornado-path.jpg

[edit]

The image contains a section of a map with hand annotations on it, and is sourced from an NOAA report archived here: https://web.archive.org/web/20060830183129/http://www.crh.noaa.gov/grr/science/19800513/19800513.pdf (page 42)

Unfortunately, the author (Janis "John" Laurens) does not identify the original map, so we can't determine its copyright status.

Because we have no way of knowing whether this is a free image or not, we need to delete this under COM:PRP. Rlandmann (talk) 12:41, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alojzia Martinková so svojimi rodičmi (december 1969)..png

[edit]

The photo was published in the 1960s and was taken in Slovenia. Is the photo still protected by copyright or has it entered the public domain in Slovenia? Astrinko (talk) 12:49, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1/ The idea to introduce the personality of A. Kočíková, born Martinková was mainly motivated by her life story, which began to unfold dramatically with the onset of normalization in Czechoslovakia after 1970. The political and social processes in this period had an adverse effect on her life destiny, so I believed that their approach has a wider justification.
2/ The article is based on the facts stated in the magazine Romboid - see References.
3/ I accepted the requests for the inclusion of links, in the References section there are 6 factual links.
4/ The photo was taken in Slovakia, it is not protected by copyright, as the copyright was given to me by donating the photo in question.
1/ Myšlienka priblížiť na stránkach Wikipedie osobnosť A. Kočíkovej, rod. Martinkovej bola motivovaná hlavne jej životným príbehom, ktorý sa začal dramaticky odvíjať nástupom normalizácie v Česko-Slovensku po roku 1970. Politicko-spoločenské procesy v tomto období mali neblahý vplyv na jej životné osudy, preto som sa domnievala, že ich priblíženie majú širšie opodstatnenie.
2/Príspevok je vytvorený na základe skutočností uvedených v časopise Romboid - viď Referencie.
3/ Požiadavky na zapracovanie odkazov som akceptovala, v oddiele Referencie je uvedených 6 faktografických odkazov.
4/Foto vzniklo na Slovensku, nie je chránená autorským právom, keďže autorské právami boli dané darovaním predmetnej fotografie. AdrianaDusana (talk) 14:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


File:The forces of the Balli Kombëtar.jpg

[edit]

The same photo was deleted in 2022, see sq:Skeda:BALLI ~1.JPG giving en:File:Balli_Kombëtar.jpg as reference. In my opinion, we could keep it with proper licensing and reference as definitely pre 1946 and photographer unknown. Higher resolution available at https://borba.me/danas-se-navrsava-osam-decenija-od-genocida-u-velici/ : License: PD-old ; date: 1939–1945; author: unknown. Albinfo (talk) 13:21, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Raided gang-run internet ‘scam farm’ in Bamban, north of Manila, the Philippines (53832378270).jpg

[edit]

No freedom of panorama in the Philippines, so it should be kicked out of Commons, though the resolution of this photo can be retained because it is free in the United States Ishagaturo (talk) 14:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


File:Closed-system vacuum setup.jpg

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:48, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings,
I created this image originally as an illustration for our paper and a patent (both are cited in Wikipedia Distillation article). It is available in the public domain, please see for example the following: https://patents.google.com/patent/US20210178287A1/en
Thanks
Vladimir Kolesnichenko 2600:8807:5600:4520:D997:66EB:1F76:43E9 17:49, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:GD 廣東 Guangdong 中山 Zhongshan 西區 XiQu District 富華道 Fuhua Road 天悅城商場 TYC Mall 書展 book exhibition August 2024 R12S 11.jpg

[edit]

Copyrighted book covers in China. Solomon203 (talk) 14:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:GD 廣東 Guangdong 中山 Zhongshan 西區 XiQu District 富華道 Fuhua Road 天悅城商場 TYC Mall 書展 book exhibition August 2024 R12S 12.jpg

[edit]

Copyrighted book covers in China. Solomon203 (talk) 14:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:GD 廣東 Guangdong 中山 Zhongshan 西區 XiQu District 富華道 Fuhua Road 天悅城商場 TYC Mall 書展 book exhibition August 2024 R12S 13.jpg

[edit]

Copyrighted book covers in China. Solomon203 (talk) 14:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:GD 廣東 Guangdong 中山 Zhongshan 西區 XiQu District 富華道 Fuhua Road 天悅城商場 TYC Mall 書展 book exhibition August 2024 R12S 14.jpg

[edit]

Copyrighted book covers in China. Solomon203 (talk) 14:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:GD 廣東 Guangdong 中山 Zhongshan 西區 XiQu District 富華道 Fuhua Road 天悅城商場 TYC Mall 書展 book exhibition August 2024 R12S 10.jpg

[edit]

Copyrighted book covers in China. Solomon203 (talk) 14:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by RosendaleRealty (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused advertisement of company of questionable notability.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:59, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:20240823 Suga Yongsan Police Station 01.png

[edit]

Photo was taken by media without subject's consent during an unapproved/illegal photo line. This was not taken during a press conference. There is a single ingress/egress to the station. Any photos or statements were coerced as he needed to present to the station for investigation.

Photo lines in South Korea refer to the press line that forms outside of the police station. (https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/opinion/2024/08/638_262581.html)

In this particular case, press reported that police stated there would be no photo line. The media disregarded and gathered outside anyway.

"The police rejected a photoline, a legal way for the press to gather and address serious criminals. Despite this, reporters were seen lining up outside on August 22, 2024." https://www.desimartini.com/international/ott/army-have-the-last-laugh-bts-suga-does-not-appear-at-police-station-while-k-media-swarms-entrance-since-morning/10e1479f80842/

Per South Korean privacy/photography laws, consent is required to photograph and publish a picture. (https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements) Jkking6 (talk) 17:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Info: Still available on CC-licensed https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KAazwHMO2NI. --Achim55 (talk) 18:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep: In the source video, linked above, the subject is freely walking out of a building, in public, and stops in front of reporters to give a prepared statement into two awaiting microphones. Logically I would think that knowingly standing in front of reporters and photographers and giving a prepared statement constitutes implied consent.
The source given for "consent to photograph" in South Korea on Commons:Country specific consent requirements states that the subject simply needs to be aware that recording is happening in that location for implied consent to photograph to be assumed. I would argue there was no possibility that the subject did not know he was being photographed by speaking in front of a gaggle reporters.
A strong case could be made for "lack of consent to photograph" if the subject had attempted to avoid the reporters, ignored them, covered his face, or been surrounded by security, but given the fact that he stood in front of reporters and gave a prepared statement I think it's pretty clear that there was implied consent to photograph. RachelTensions (talk) 01:43, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reiterating that "any photos or statements were coerced as he needed to present to the station for investigation" and that a photo line had not been permitted by the authorities.
It is a case of taking the path that would cause the least disturbance as he is acutely aware of the attacks to follow if he did any of the actions you listed. This is already evidenced by the articles from the day prior, when the press mistakenly assumed he was scheduled to report to the station and they accused him of not showing up and avoiding them, as well as threats made against him by reporters such as the following excerpt:
(https://tenasia.hankyung.com/article/2024081435074)
"앞선 가수 김호중의 사례처럼 취재진을 피하거나 따돌리는 경우가 발 생하면 오히려 반성의 진정성에 대한 의심을 살 가능성이 높다."
Machine translation:
"As in the previous case of singer Kim Ho-joong, if there is a case of avoiding or ostracizing the reporters, there is a high possibility of doubting the authenticity of reflection."
Essentially it boils down to 'show up and give us the statement and photos that we want or else we'll paint you a liar.'
Consent not given freely is not consent. Jkking6 (talk) 17:41, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete: I agree with the argument - consent under duress isn't consent. I believe the upload was in good faith seeing as it complies with CC requirements but hearing more about the circumstances, I feel iffy in the file remaining. I also don't see the point in keeping this photo as I can't imagine it having any use on his or any other Wikipedia article in the future. The photo in itself isn't notable, it's just related to an incident of his that is notable, without providing any actual visual aid for it. Orangesclub (talk) 13:19, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete: Agree with the previous comment. The picture itself is not particularly good or high quality; we have better relatively current ones to use if needed.
WP:BLPIMAGE covers this: Images of living persons should not be used out of context to present a person in a false or disparaging light. This is particularly important for police booking photographs (mugshots), or situations where the subject did not expect to be photographed. Using this picture can create the false impression that he has been convicted of a crime, and/or that the situation is way worse than it is. We need to be extra careful with BLPs. I know the subject did not expect to be photographed part has been contested cause he spoke to journalists but, as other people have explained, there is a single entrance to the police station so avoiding the media was impossible. Moreover, refusing to publicly apologize in those circumstances is not really an option and pretty much expected from public figures. Coerced consent is not really consent. - Ïvana (talk) 15:06, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


File:Jaime de Borbón y Battemberg.jpg

[edit]

This file was initially tagged by 91.126.85.34 as Copyvio (Copyviol) and the most recent rationale was: Not own work. Metadata says "Author: ANL/Shutterstock (3835297a)" Yann (talk) 19:40, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A 1935 picture could be in the public domain, depending on the country of origin, and the publication history. Yann (talk) 19:41, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Info the image may be taken in London. Compare with this other image from 6 March 1935 in which Emmanuelle wears the same clothing as in the present image. 91.126.85.34 21:29, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is probably in the public domain in UK, but may be not in USA, if it wasn't published there at the time. Yann (talk) 21:36, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Info found at Ebay a copy of this image with publication date on 26 March 1935 and credit to ACME. According to that publication (maybe from the US or the UK), the image was taken in Victoria Station in London. 91.126.85.34 21:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by ZeetBaralWiki (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Claimed own-work, but seems unlikely this uploader would have been in all four actual locations. More likely found on web or social-media sites. Other "own-work" by this uploader have been easily found on the web.

DMacks (talk) 20:06, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:AshleyTesoro2023.jpg

[edit]

Looks like a pro photo taken at an event. No EXIF on upload. Other images claimed as owned by uploader are copyvios so claim took picture dubious Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:09, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:God s Creation.jpg

[edit]

nothing to see Joschi71 (talk) 20:30, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That was at the end of the first day. ;o) Yann (talk) 18:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/2024/08/24&oldid=919811037"