Commons:Deletion requests/2024/08/29

28 August 2024

30 August 2024

Deletion requests on 29 August 2024

August 29

Files uploaded by Locartee (talk · contribs)

Out of scope: unused math formulas and one table (File:PLANNING PHYS.png) of unclear significance.

Omphalographer (talk) 00:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Redundant. We have rich text equations for most mathematical functions needed. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:06, 5 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.

Files uploaded by Stahlecker (talk · contribs)

These are all personal images of a man who has made no useful contributions to Commons, and who has repeatedly broken the rules after being warned.

. Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 03:23, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Stahlecker (talk · contribs)

Out of scope: miscellaneous personal and decorative images, all unused outside userspace.

Omphalographer (talk) 00:12, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete These should be F10 honestly. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:YORKSHIRE DOG.png

Out of scope: I'm not sure what this blurry green shape is supposed to be, but it definitely isn't recognizable as a dog. Omphalographer (talk) 00:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I have no idea what this is. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files found with WATERCOLOR "8101022@N05"

Out of scope: unused, heavily filtered photos, mostly of landscapes and outdoor subjects, batch imported from Flickr. Some of these may be of notable subjects, but the "watercolor" filter that's been applied to all of them makes them unsuitable for educational use. (They don't even look like watercolors; it's really more of a "posterize" filter.)

Omphalographer (talk) 00:51, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The postprocessing is annoying, and I wouldn't strenuously object to any of these being deleted, but I also wouldn't object if anyone feels some of these are worth saving. I haven't the patience to go through them all, but for example I could imagine keeping File:BOULDER MT, UT - 2016-09-30 fall color -22b (31659772705).jpg or File:INDIAN RIVER REC AREA NATURE TRAIL(11-01-2016) indian river, alexander state forest, evangeline parish, la -20 (31247016410).jpg. - Jmabel ! talk 02:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even those images don't look very good up close - the thumbnails look kind of okay because the effects of the filter are blurred out, but it falls apart on closer inspection. The second one in particular has weird colored halos around the leaves. Omphalographer (talk) 03:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I agree with Jmabel sentiment here, some of the images might be usable or even useful even if only to demonstrate what the Photoshop "watercolor" filter/tool does to images. So, the images could simply demonstrate the technical possibilities and limitations of said filter/tool. I also uploaded a similar set of photos for the Canon EOS 250D camera to demonstrate its "creativity mode": File:Tagetes taken with Canon EOS 250D (blue filter) (20240707200421).jpg, File:Tagetes taken with Canon EOS 250D (old-style photograph effect) (20240707200039).jpg, File:Tagetes taken with Canon EOS 250D (aquarelle effect - hue 2) (20240707200308).jpg — that last one may not even be anything close to an "aquarelle" painting, but that's what the Canon camera calls this filter anyways. Though my set probably makes it easier to serve an educational or demonstrative purpose because it's always the same motive of flowers, just with different filter. Still, I think those Photoshop images can be used in a similar way, but there's probably no need to have this many of them. For illustration purposes one could pick one example for "Photoshop's watercolor effect applied on landscape", "... applied on people", "... applied on buildings/structures", "... applied on flowers". Something along those lines. Nakonana (talk) 11:59, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A note on those images that the result doesn't look much like watercolors but more like posterization might even increase the educational value of the images, because now we'd not only have an illustration of Photoshop's watercolor tool but also one on posterization. Which would also help explaining the techniques to make such images or the technological aspects behind the watercolor filter. Nakonana (talk) 12:05, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This makes sense to me. Keep a few as examples. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:47, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If there's a need for sample files to demonstrate image filters, surely it'd be easier (and have greater educational value) to create new ones, rather than trying to "reverse-engineer" samples from this set? Using these images as samples has the huge disadvantage that we don't have the source image, so we can't demonstrate what the original looked like or what the filter looks like with different settings. Omphalographer (talk) 19:58, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps. I see your point. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:52, 7 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.

Files uploaded by AnvarxonM (talk · contribs)

Low resolution images watermarked to https://pfl.uz

Lord Belbury (talk) 14:28, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete clearly visible watermark in both images; surely not the uploader's own work. --Mosbatho (talk) 16:03, 7 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Already deleted. --Gbawden (talk) 12:00, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by AnvarxonM (talk · contribs)

Dubious own-work claims. No EXIF and uploader has a long history of copyright violations, including three separate blocks for uploading unfree files. COM:PCP applies.

✗plicit 00:43, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not sure There is FOP for these photos. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:17, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:1890s bicycle IMG 0043.JPG

Image is poor quality due to blur. File:Bicycles Panhandle Plains Museum Canyon Texas 2024.jpg shows the equivalent information. Nv8200p (talk) 00:49, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep not a valid reason to delete. While not great, it doesn’t mean it should be deleted, people can choose what they want to use/view. Bidgee (talk) 01:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure it is. Commons:Deletion_policy#Redundant/bad_quality states an inferior image to an alternative version is a reason for deletion. Nv8200p (talk) 02:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but “case-by-case basis” and I don’t think this file meets that. To me it seems like you want your photo to be the only one. Bidgee (talk) 04:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I took my image (along with some others) specifically to replace the other image because it is blurred. Nv8200p (talk) 04:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think in this case the photos may be similar enough to justify deleting the blurry one. The non-blurry one could have a cropped version to focus on the bike that the blurry one is focusing on. Maybe having such a crop would make it easier to judge whether the new photo would be an appropriate replacement of the old one. Nakonana (talk) 12:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Beijing Guoan

Per COM:FOP China, freedom of panorama does not extend to 2D works in China. These are photos of photos on a jumbotron.

✗plicit 01:15, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ninoflu.png

Possível violação de direitos autorais. O usuário colocou a imagem como sendo de sua autoria e de agosto de 2024. No entanto, ela pode ser encontrada em alguns sites e matérias com anos anteriores. Páginas com a imagem: 1. "https://explosaotricolor.com.br/fenerbahce-oficializa-proposta-pelo-zagueiro-nino-do-fluminense-diz-jornalista-turco/". 2. "https://d.gazetadealagoas.com.br/esportes/405646/nino-e-cortado-da-selecao-brasileira". 3. "https://www.dci.com.br/esporte/futebol/libertadores/onde-assistir-olimpia-x-fluminense-na-tv-de-graca-e-horario-16-03/239996/". 4. "https://explosaotricolor.com.br/porto-de-portugal-tambem-esta-interessado-em-contar-com-nino-diz-jornalista/". 5. "https://www.facebook.com/ClubFlu/posts/nino-simplesmente-o-melhor-zagueiro-do-brasil-/2748672941945101/". 6. "https://www.facebook.com/FluminenseFC/photos/a.578980948826304/5282884581769227/?type=3&eid=ARAsxzkivQpKL6N-oQnP3H0x4vnoaQCeRItnQw1T9qlrRUUb1Pb8lBHmYWLb6sktqS30FyDW0qaCOvfl&locale=ms_MY&_rdr". 7. "https://m.aksam.com.tr/sporplus/fenerbahcede-buyuk-nino-pismanligi-kacan-balik-buyuk-oldu/haber-1317484". 8. "https://www.fotospor.com/fenerbahce/jesus-henrique-yi-nino-ya-tercih-etti-523580/". 9. "https://www.cnnturk.com/spor/futbol/fenerbahcede-kimin-yerine-nino-geliyor-1816023?page=5". 10. "https://t24.com.tr/foto-haber/fenerbahce-nin-stoper-adaylari,16643/4". Observe que a imagem está presente em várias páginas Leandro M800 (talk) 01:28, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alent.svg

This appears sufficiently creative enough for protection in its home country, the United Kingdom. In particular, look at the extension of the arm of the "T" and the tail (?) on the "A". See COM:TOO United Kingdom and refer to the case concerning en:File:EDGE magazine (logo).svg. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 01:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:EBS Rainbow Card 1970s.jpg

I don't see this picture on other website, this picture maybe is false. 45.64.241.200 01:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alphabet Business Concern logo.svg

Unless the curly design has been taken from a public domain work, this logo published alongside the release of the album in 1989 is likely creative enough for copyright protection in its home country, the UK. See COM:TOO United Kingdom. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 02:05, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:ClassicMiniLogo.svg

Highly unlikely to be own work; almost certainly eligible for copyright protection in its home country, the UK as per COM:TOO United Kingdom. If it was created at the same time the car was (1959) it would still be under copyright. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 02:10, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy F1/F4 please. definitely meets UK TOO. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logomerrikh.jpg

This is a derivitve work of a logo that is on the borderline of being too complex. Is it PD-textlogo or CSD F3? The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Defnitly F3, the shield being interrupted brings it over TOO. Regardless, Percautionary principle applies here. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:A tornado near Athensville, Illinois on April 18, 2024.png

This image of an event that happened on April 19, 2024 was re-tweeted on the @NWSStLouis X stream[1]

The original tweet[2] was by Byron Hurley (@ByronNatureMan).

There is no claim that he was acting as an employee of the US federal government, or that the photo was ineligible for copyright for any other reason. Therefore, as a photo taken in the United States after 1989, copyright existed from the moment it was taken.

A re-tweet by the NWS does not claim or imply that the photographer transferred his rights into the public domain or published this image under a free license.

Indeed, later in the same thread, multiple media outlets including @WeatherNation, KMOV, and @FOXWeatherDesk ask for permission to re-publish the image, to which he replies every time, "DM me for licensing"

This is clearly not a free image. Rlandmann (talk) 03:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete per precautionary principle. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 10:58, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ashiwada l (44011915155).png

Copyrighted map, not Flickr user's work A1Cafel (talk) 03:22, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ashiwada (29987623447).png

Copyrighted map, not Flickr user's work A1Cafel (talk) 03:17, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:DESIGNCO EXPORT.png

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 03:30, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete G10 Please. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Salem, Iowa EF2 tornado on April 16, 2024.jpg

This image was published on X on April 17, 2024 by Owen Szarley (@OwenWxIllinois) . [3]

In the thread that follows, @NWSQuadCities asks "Hi Owen. Would you be alright if we use this photo in our post event graphics and web page?"[4]

to which Szarley replies, "Yes of course with credit!"[5]

This does not place the image into the Public Domain, but does license NWS Quad Cities to re-use the photo " in our post event graphics and web page" , on the condition that credit is given.

NWSQuadCities then reposted the image, with the credit "Photo: Owen Szarley"[6]

In this rare example where we can actually see the license contract between photographer and the NWS, we can see specifically what the photographer agreed to: and it's not the Public Domain nor a free license.

As an image created in the United States after 1989, copyright was created the moment the image was. Rlandmann (talk) 03:41, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Strong delete as this is a possible copyright violation. Beyond PRP. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 11:06, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Muaythairec (talk · contribs)

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 03:45, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete G10. It's amazing. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Anasuya feeding the Hindu Trinity, The Krishna-Sudama Temple of Porbandar, India (cropped).JPG

No need for a cropped version to exist Yuyutsu Ho (talk) 04:39, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Not a valid reason for deletion. —Tcr25 (talk) 15:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Glenn Sterle.png

While this is a still from a YouTube video with a Creative Commons licence, the description of the video on YouTube includes this text "DISCLAIMER: This channel is NOT the official channel of the Australian Parliament... REAL SOURCE: http://parlview.aph.gov.au/browse.php". The APH website, invoked as the "real source", uploads under a CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 Deed licence, which is not suitable for Wikimedia Commons Neegzistuoja (talk) 04:42, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Otter Tail County Historical Museum-05.jpg

No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 04:56, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP We have had discussions about this in the past. Architectural elements/design versus artwork. It is a vague and understandable error, as buildings nowadays are void of design elements. Back in the 1900s, in the City Beautiful Movement, while famous artists did signature artwork pieces (and copyrighted), much of was looked at as design that was simply part of the building. In the future, as I have requested before, please provide your own rationale rather than just a FoP template. I consider doing such an abuse of power. While many are FoP can be obvious copyright violations many others are not. If you cannot be bothered to provide your own comments to defend your actions you should really reconsider how you are doing what you are doing. This is not about racking up statics for most edits. Myotus (talk) 16:59, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The photo, as far as I can tell, shows animal "sculptures" as part of a fence. I wouldn't call that a 2D work, because a fence is 3D and the animal "sculptures" aren't just painted on it, so they are also 3D works. So the nomination is a bit confusing. However, the defense above is equally confusing because the image isn't showing a building? It's a fence? So, the question is: what's the FoP's stance on fences with artistic elements? Are fences utilitarian per se? Or are fences with clear decorative elements protected like sculptures or some other type of artwork? Nakonana (talk) 14:07, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also no FOP for 3D works in the United States. --A1Cafel (talk) 03:34, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What about the utalitarian aspect? Are fences considered art work or utalitarian? The photo shows an integral part of a fence — it could be seen as art or "just a fence". Nakonana (talk) 10:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There might be a stronger case for A1Cafel if there were consistency in what is nominated for deletion. There appears to be a strong bias to call architectural design elements using recognizable images "art" and nominate them for deletion but to completely ignore abstract architectural elements called "art" that are tied to an artist. See "Hive (artwork)" which has been posted on the Commons for 12 years as a case in point. Additionally, it is concerning, at least in the US, that states considered to be part of the fly-over country are the ones that usually have their photos targeted for deletion, while coastal states, especially those of NYC, are often left untouched. Again see Hive (artwork) as well as File:Albemarle Playground td (2023-04-29) 06.jpg and File:Community Garden Fence Art (14645742175).jpg and File:Kissena Park. Train on entrance fence. 20200920 144355.jpg and even File:Brooklyn Bears Communtiy Garden 4.jpg (that also has a billboard violating copyright). As far as Wikpedia's WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, I do prefer to reframe it as Wikipedia's "Do as a say not as I do" rule for the privileged so they can keep photos of their interests (usually white, male and urban). Myotus (talk) 03:01, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:British northrop.jpg

Description and date do not line up. User uploaded it while also uploading copyright-violating text to en:British Northrop Loom Co Ltd. Highly unlikely to be own work - and currently not in use on any Wikiproject. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 05:47, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by User:Devangae200

All these images are claimed to be own work- however, several have artist credits within the image themselves. They uploader added them while editing a now-deleted Wikipedia page, while adding several text-based copyright violations. Based on a post they made on their enWiki account, they would have likely been very young at the time some of the photographs were taken, making the own work claim on those suspect.

Permission may perhaps be plausible, given they claimed to be a student volunteer, but a student volunteer does not have the power to unilaterally donate their group's works to Commons. --GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 05:59, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Harshassr (talk · contribs)

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 06:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Revathi at the screening of Masaala at PVR Phoenix (1).jpg

Copyright Sudeep160 (talk) 06:39, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Revathi (cropped).jpg

Copyright Sudeep160 (talk) 06:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jarrell tornado path.jpg

This image was sourced from the w:NOAA journal w:Storm Data, Volume 39, number 5, May 1997.[7], page 6.

This photo was taken in the United States in May 1997 by Troy Kimmel, KimCo Meteorological Services, Austin, TX. There is no claim or suggestion that he was working as an employee of the US federal government or that this image was ineligible for copyright for any other reason. Therefore, as an image created in the US after 1989, copyright came into being as soon as the image was made.

The submission guidelines of the journal (page 2) state:

"The editor of STORM DATA solicits your help in acquiring photographs (prints or slides; black and white, or color), maps, clippings, etc. of significant or unusual weather events (past or present). These could be for use in the "Outstanding Storms of the Month or "Et Cetera sections of STORM DATA. We request our subscribers or other interested persons to mail such items to: [address] Any such items received by the editor will be for use in STORM DATA only. Any other use will be with the permission of the owner of said items." (emphasis mine).

We have no evidence that the copyright holder permitted any further use beyond publication in Storm Data, let alone surrendered their rights into the public domain. Rlandmann (talk) 07:02, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete per precautionary principle. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 11:01, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the disclaimer. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs) 23:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you might have forgotten the part of the disclaimer that reads "Third-party information and imagery are used under license by the individual third-party provider. [...] Please contact the third-party provider for information on your rights to further use these data/products." And also that the NWS generally just captions works under third-party copyrights as "Courtesy of..." or "Photo by..." (examples), as they did here. That reading of the disclaimer only works if (a) you deliberately choose not read any more than one sentence of it, and (b) deliberately ignore all the evidence of how the NWS has generally applied captions to images. --Rlandmann (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jarrell tornado funnel.jpg

This image was sourced from the w:NOAA journal w:Storm Data, Volume 39, number 5, May 1997.[8], page 5.

This photo was taken in the United States in May 1997 by Charlotte Vancil. There is no claim or suggestion that she was working as an employee of the US federal government or that this image was ineligible for copyright for any other reason. Therefore, as an image created in the US after 1989, copyright came into being as soon as the image was made.

The submission guidelines of the journal (page 2) state:

"The editor of STORM DATA solicits your help in acquiring photographs (prints or slides; black and white, or color), maps, clippings, etc. of significant or unusual weather events (past or present). These could be for use in the "Outstanding Storms of the Month or "Et Cetera sections of STORM DATA. We request our subscribers or other interested persons to mail such items to: [address] Any such items received by the editor will be for use in STORM DATA only. Any other use will be with the permission of the owner of said items." (emphasis mine).

We have no evidence that the copyright holder permitted any further use beyond publication in Storm Data, let alone surrendered their rights into the public domain. Rlandmann (talk) 07:05, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete per precautionary principle. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 11:00, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the disclaimer. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs) 23:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you might have forgotten the part of the disclaimer that reads "Third-party information and imagery are used under license by the individual third-party provider. [...] Please contact the third-party provider for information on your rights to further use these data/products." And also that the NWS generally just captions works under third-party copyrights as "Courtesy of..." or "Photo by..." (examples), as they did here. That reading of the disclaimer only works if (a) you deliberately choose not read any more than one sentence of it, and (b) deliberately ignore all the evidence of how the NWS has generally applied captions to images. --Rlandmann (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jarrell tornado up close 1997.jpg

This image was sourced from the w:NOAA journal w:Storm Data, Volume 39, number 5, May 1997.[9], page 1.

This photo was taken in the United States in May 1997 by Scott Beckwith of Jarrell Farm Supply, Jarrell Texas. There is no claim or suggestion that he was working as an employee of the US federal government or that this image was ineligible for copyright for any other reason. Therefore, as an image created in the US after 1989, copyright came into being as soon as the image was made.

The submission guidelines of the journal (page 2) state:

"The editor of STORM DATA solicits your help in acquiring photographs (prints or slides; black and white, or color), maps, clippings, etc. of significant or unusual weather events (past or present). These could be for use in the "Outstanding Storms of the Month or "Et Cetera sections of STORM DATA. We request our subscribers or other interested persons to mail such items to: [address] Any such items received by the editor will be for use in STORM DATA only. Any other use will be with the permission of the owner of said items." (emphasis mine).

We have no evidence that the copyright holder permitted any further use beyond publication in Storm Data, let alone surrendered their rights into the public domain. Rlandmann (talk) 07:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete per precautionary principle. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 11:02, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the disclaimer. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs) 19:54, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alka-Lamba1.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Sahaib as no permission (No permission) Krd 07:12, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mahua Moitra.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Sahaib as no permission (No permission) Krd 07:13, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mahua Moitra (cropped)1.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Sahaib as no permission (No permission) Krd 07:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mahua Moitra (cropped).jpg

This file was initially tagged by Sahaib as no permission (No permission) Krd 07:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Priyanka Chaturvedi.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Sahaib as no permission (No permission) Krd 07:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Bernadenemvoss (talk · contribs)

1969 photos, unlikely to be own work

Gbawden (talk) 07:22, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yes - they are my photos of my father, taken by my mother and gifted to me. Bernadenemvoss (talk) 07:41, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jarrell tornado initial stages.jpg

This image was taken in the United States on May 27, 1997, by Scott Beckwith of Jarrell Farm Supply, Jarrell Texas. There is no claim or suggestion that he was working as an employee of the US federal government or that this image was ineligible for copyright for any other reason. Therefore, as an image created in the US after 1989, copyright came into being as soon as the image was made.

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 there is no evidence to connect it with the Sioux City office image submission guidelines, so this rationale does not appear to apply either. Rlandmann (talk) 07:35, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete per precautionary principle. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 11:01, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the disclaimer. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs) 23:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you might have forgotten the part of the disclaimer that reads "Third-party information and imagery are used under license by the individual third-party provider. [...] Please contact the third-party provider for information on your rights to further use these data/products." And also that the NWS generally just captions works under third-party copyrights as "Courtesy of..." or "Photo by..." (examples), as they did here. That reading of the disclaimer only works if (a) you deliberately choose not read any more than one sentence of it, and (b) deliberately ignore all the evidence of how the NWS has generally applied captions to images. --Rlandmann (talk) 00:21, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files found with Special:Search/Portal de Dados Abertos - TSE incategory:"All media needing categories as of 2024"

I am unable to verify the free license claim. © TSE - Tribunal Superior Eleitoral at source

Gbawden (talk) 07:36, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. In order to clarify and avoid confusion, the template on most of these recently uploaded files on Wikipedia for the 2024 and earlier elections indicates that the pictures are from the TSE Dataset Open Source (Portal de Dados Abertos do TSE) and do not infringe any copyright rules on Wikimedia Commons. Many of these pictures are the same ones used for candidates from the 2022, 2020, 2018, 2016, and even 2012 elections or earlier.

The examples of pictures you listed for deletion on my Talk Page on Wikimedia Commons come from the following pages:

Most pictures licensed by the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) of Brazil use the CC BY 4.0 license. You can find information about this license on the file pages:

TSE Dataset for 2024 Candidates (Portal de Dados Abertos do Tribunal Superior Eleitoral - TSE) – Information is available on the left side of the page.
Commons Attribution License (cc-by) – Domain of Application: Content, Data (version 4.0 only)

Since the deadline for registering candidacies with the Superior Electoral Court of Brazil ended on August 16, 2024, the .rar file containing the candidates' pictures has been uploaded to the TSE Dataset for 2024 Candidates. You can download the .rar file with these images from the Explore menu (Explorar). Simply download the .rar file for the state you are interested in and locate the pictures using the ID number and candidate number listed on the DivulgaCand website.

To demonstrate this, you can find the .rar file containing pictures of candidates running in the 2024 Curitiba mayoral election and other mayoral elections in the state of Paraná under PR - Fotos de candidatos (PR stands for Paraná, with Curitiba being the capital city). After downloading the .rar file, most images will be labeled with "FPR" (indicating Paraná). For other states, such as São Paulo, the file codes will start with "FSP" (for São Paulo), "FMG" (for Minas Gerais), and so on. For example, Tiago Chico’s picture can be found in the .rar file as FPR160002029786_div.jpg (where 160002029786 is the unique identifier for his candidacy) on the same link mentioned.

I uploaded these files because I believe they are licensed under CC BY 4.0, a license that is permitted for use on Wikipedia. I hope this clarifies why I think these pictures are allowed to be hosted on Wikimedia Commons.

Thank you very much. Sailoratlantis (talk) 08:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additional source that may prove the Wikimedia Commons license I'm referring to:

Instrução Normativa nº 8, de 20 de novembro de 2020: This document from the Superior Electoral Court (Tribunal Superior Eleitoral - TSE) outlines regulations for the Biblioteca Digital da Justiça Eleitoral (BDJE) [Digital Library of Electoral Justice in English] and confirms that content in this repository can use Creative Commons licenses, including the Creative Commons 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows for sharing, adapting, and commercial use, provided proper attribution is given.

For more details, you may refer to the document here (note that the full document is in Portuguese and may require translation for full understanding).

Unfortunately, the link listed on the style guide for the template TSE-Dados-Abertos (found on this image) is now returning a 404 error ("404 Erro! Página não encontrada."), and I am unable to locate a copy of the PDF file that specifies the license details. Despite the broken link, the information in the document may confirm that the images I've uploaded to Wikimedia Commons are under the CC BY 4.0 license as per TSE guidelines and Wikimedia Commons' licensing requirements. Sailoratlantis (talk) 09:10, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Termo de Autorização para Publicação na BDJE (Authorization Term for Publication in the Digital Library of Electoral Justice of Brazil) is a formal authorization document used by the Biblioteca Digital da Justiça Eleitoral (BDJE) (Digital Library of Electoral Justice of Brazil) to publish and make documents publicly available. Here’s a breakdown of the relevant sections in the context of the Creative Commons BY 4.0 license:

Authorization for Publication:
- The document grants BDJE permission to freely publish and distribute the mentioned documents according to the Creative Commons 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) as declared by the author or institution.
License Conditions:
- Adaptations: The document allows for adaptations of the work to be shared, with the option for adaptations to be shared under the same terms.
- Commercial Use: The document specifies whether the work can be used commercially.
- Copyright Protection: It confirms that the work remains protected by copyright and other applicable laws. Any use outside the terms of the license or copyright law is prohibited.
Authorization Details:
- The form includes fields for the location and date of signing, as well as the signature of the author or representative, ensuring that the permissions granted are clear and legally authorized.

This formal authorization ensures that the use of the works aligns with the Creative Commons terms and BDJE regulations. Despite the broken link to the original style guide, this document confirms that the images uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, which follow these guidelines, are indeed licensed under CC BY 4.0.

I hope this additional information clarifies the licensing status of the images in question.

Thank you very much. Sailoratlantis (talk) 09:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sailoratlantis If the license is on a different page you need to provide that link under the permission field, especially if there are conflicting license claims like this. I have added the link to the permission section on these files for you Gbawden (talk) 09:34, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I have a question regarding the use of links from the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) platform, such as the one provided from DivulgaCand (TSE’s platform for candidates). Would including this link in the source section, along with a statement that the content is from the TSE platform (Portal de Dados Abertos do TSE - TSE Open Data Portal), be sufficient to demonstrate that the images are licensed under Creative Commons 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)? I understand that the TSE platform typically uses this license for its content.

Thank you! Sailoratlantis (talk) 09:45, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I checked File:Carmem Julia (foto oficial para o TSE).jpg following roughly the steps from Sailoratlantis . This particular image can be found inside the ZIP file (warning 250 MB!) from https://dadosabertos.tse.jus.br/dataset/candidatos-2024/resource/4ca481ad-e4cf-4f49-ac80-1a37a331467e. The file name is FRN200002054424_div.jpg and the ZIP file. The link to the ZIP files states clearly that the dataset has a CC-BY 4.0 license. As all the other images come from the same source, have the same format, and size. I'm pretty sure the same analysis can be made. The problem is that there are many of such ZIP files under https://dadosabertos.tse.jus.br/dataset/candidatos-2024. Günther Frager (talk) 17:12, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another point – One of the main reasons I didn't download the .rar file to check Tiago Chico's ID link and associate the identifier with the file is that the .rar file wasn't even available on the Portal de Dados Abertos do TSE before August 16, 2024, which was the deadline to register candidacies. Additionally, these files are quite large— the São Paulo file, for example, might exceed 1GB due to the 644 cities in the state. Before August 16, you could only find pictures of these candidates via their candidacy links from the end of July to August 5, 2024, when parties first registered their candidates, but not all of them were available until the deadline.

I believe it’s important to include the ID in the file name (e.g., FPR02262665_div.jpg—just an example, not a real one) to avoid licensing issues and to allow people to verify the picture in the .rar file. Sailoratlantis (talk) 20:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Everything from this portal is under Template:TSE-Dados-Abertos. Erick Soares3 (talk) 22:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sailoratlantis Please use this template on TSE uploads in future Gbawden (talk) 10:58, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm already using the template TSE-Dados-Abertos since my first uploads; you can check it out on most of the uploaded pictures of the TSE by me on Wikimedia Commons or on the history log of most of these files. Sailoratlantis (talk) 17:31, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tropical Storm Harold—Laredo Street Flooding.jpg

This image was taken in the United States in August 2023.

The original source of this image, as cited in the StoryMaps source, was Facebook

It was taken by Rene Arrezola, and there is no claim that he was acting as an employee of the US federal government, or that the photo was ineligible for copyright for any other reason. Therefore, as a photo taken in the United States after 1989, copyright existed from the moment it was taken.

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 there is no evidence to connect it with the Sioux City office image submission guidelines, so this rationale does not appear to apply either. Rlandmann (talk) 08:02, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Strong delete per precautionary principle. Again, no evidence of permission. Let’s just assume that if it’s not on NWS servers and it’s using this template, it’s going to probably get a strong delete !vote out of me on the grounds of possible license laundering. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 11:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:SHASUN Jain College.jpg

irrelevant text inside the image Neechalkaran (talk) 08:04, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Muzaffarpur Shelter Homes case SC asks why Bihar ex Minister Manju Verma Not Arrested Brajesh Thakur.jpg

While ETV shared the YouTube video under CC, it is immediately unclear whether ETV has the necessary rights to the images it shows thru out the video to share under CC, for example the nominated depiction from ANI, thus making the derivative work ineligible for Commons -- DaxServer (talk) 08:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

+ crop at File:Muzaffarpur Shelter Homes case SC asks why Bihar ex Minister Manju Verma Not Arrested Brajesh Thakur (cropped).jpg -- DaxServer (talk) 08:11, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bitchute Image.svg

Per COM:TOO United Kingdom; the stylization should grant this copyright protection in its home country, the United Kingdom. It's already hosted locally on enWiki, and has been for the past several years, for the same reason. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 08:26, 29 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.

File:Cadbury.svg

Highly stylised logo that is certainly still under copyright. It is not composed only of simple geometric shapes. Philafrenzy (talk) 17:23, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: PD text logo Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:03, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cadbury.svg

The last deletion request ended in "keep" several months before Future v. Edge. See COM:TOO United Kingdom, this is most likely protected under UK law GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 08:30, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping @Jameslwoodward: as closer of the previous discussion. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 08:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The logo is the signature of William Adlington Barrow Cadbury which was adopted in 1921. The signature almost certainly has a copyright, see Com:United_Kingdom#Signatures. He died in 1957, so it will have a UK copyright until 1/1/2028. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:35, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cadbury (2020).svg

Per COM:TOO United Kingdom; see also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cadbury.svg for another ongoing DR. This most likely qualifies for protection under UK law. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 08:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cazoo.svg

The A being stylized into a car most likely qualifies this for copyright protection under UK law; see COM:TOO United Kingdom. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 08:32, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cheryl Cole 2010 Logo.svg

Per COM:TOO United Kingdom and COM:SIG United Kingdom, this is likely original enough for copyright protection in its home country, the UK. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 08:33, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Ataavi (talk · contribs)

Low res images taken in some cases from websites, File:Foodsecurity.jpg cites https://www.gardjagh.org/appropriate-conservation-methods-improve-food-security-professor-odamtten/ which gives no permission for reuse. User's other speedy deleted uploads have been found online and claimed as own work.

Belbury (talk) 08:35, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:A tornado funnel is shown moving through Xenia.jpg

This photo was taken on April 3, 1974, by Fred Stewart, a hospital employee in Xenia, Ohio.

It is known today in at least ~~two~~ [edit] three image repositories with conflicting and incompatible copyright and licensing terms:

[new] the w:NOAA image library, which purports to be public domain images only[10][11]
the NOAA Flickr Stream, under CC-BY-2.0[12]
the Associated Press, which claims copyright over the image and offers it for licensing: "Copyright 1974 AP. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed."[13]

There is no claim that Stewart was working as an employee of the US federal government or that the image was ineligible for copyright for any other reason.

To be protected under copyright at the time, the image needed to be published with a copyright notice and had its copyright registered. Unfortunately, we do not know the first publication of this widely-reproduced image.

It does not appear to have a separate copyright entry in the Catalog of Copyright Entries for works of art for 1974. If it wasn't registered separately, then the AP's claim to the image will depend on whether it was first published in a source that was itself registered for copyright.

Without knowing more about the details of its first publication, we have no way of assessing the AP's claim over this image and must delete under COM:PRP. Rlandmann (talk) 08:56, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep — We know for an absolute fact Fred Stewart took the photograph and we know based on the U.S. government, Fred Steward allowed users to use this photograph. Given the shear amount of usage of this photograph, including several RS media, which does not source AP, but rather Mr. Steward, this is a keep based on the NOAA Photo Library statement above. WeatherWriter (talk) 16:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't place much stock in fourth-party attributions, but since some folks do, the following media sources (for a start...) attribute the AP as their source:
- St Louis Post-Dispatch (note the wording on this one... "A funnel cloud bearing down on Xenia, Ohio, April 5, 1974, was one of several moments captured by the AP on this date in history", emphasis mine)
- Cincinnati Enquirer (who, if anyone, should know better if this wasn't the case, and if media sources can be used to assess ownership this way)
- Toronto Star
- Akron Beacon-Journal
- Washington Post
- USA Today
- Spectrum News
- WHIO
- Newsday
We can both find plenty more. --Rlandmann (talk) 19:36, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is quite possible that these media got the image from AP. However, given that AP date is wrong, I don't give much credence to their copyright claim. AP having a copy doesn't give them the copyright. Yann (talk) 19:41, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, owning a copy ≠ owning copyright. And fourth-party attributions aren't good evidence anyway, which is why I didn't include them in the DR and only raised them when the subject was brought up.

Yann, you've been here a lot longer than me; can you think of any examples of how we've handled cases of suspected over-reach in the past? --Rlandmann (talk) 19:47, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is significant doubt that the AP claim to this photo is real and legitimate. Per the associated press’ claim, this photo was created “Apr 2, 1974 7:00 PM”. This is physically impossible as the tornado (w:1974 Xenia tornado) formed April 3, 1974, 4:30 PM. The AP claim this photo was taken almost an entire day before the tornado even occurred. Given we have the NOAA claim of free-to-use CC 2.0 statement, this puts significant doubt on this. Possibly a license laundering from the AP. WeatherWriter (talk) 16:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this is probably a case of an over-reach by the AP, but without details of the original publication, I can't prove that.

Do you know where this image was first published? My guess is a small Ohio regional paper, after which the AP purchased it for syndication. But if it was originally published in a paper not registered for copyright, then it would have been too late for the AP to claim copyright under pre-1989 law. --Rlandmann (talk) 19:42, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(FWIW, it looks like the local paper was the Xenia Daily Gazette and there are claims out there that Stewart was the hospital's PR director; this might be leads that help settle the question...) --Rlandmann (talk) 20:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per WeatherWriter reasoning. Pierre cb (talk) 16:22, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per WeatherWriter. Fake AP copyright claim. Yann (talk) 17:14, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per above. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 10:58, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:محمد سليماني.jpg

This is an image that was going to be used for an article, but the article was deleted (w:en:Draft:Mohammed Slimani) Ahmedgalal433 (talk) 17:32, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It still could be a useful photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Kalamastra (talk · contribs)

User with bad history, small files without EXIF data, unlikely to be own works.

Yann (talk) 09:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Iamsanjivk (talk · contribs)

Pictures of pictures, watermark, derivative works, wrong license, permission needed.

Yann (talk) 09:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Iamsanjivk (talk · contribs)

User with bad history, small images without EXIF data, unlikely to be own works.

Yann (talk) 09:59, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:نابليون بونابرت بمساعدة الذكاء الاصطناعي.png

Unused AI-generated image, out of scope. Yann (talk) 10:05, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. An uninspired, vaguely malformed AI recreation of File:David, Jacques-Louis - Bonaparte franchissant le Grand-Saint-Bernard - Château de Versailles MV 8550 Abu Dhabi.jpg. (The filename makes it clear that the subject is intended to represent Napoleon.) Omphalographer (talk) 10:35, 29 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 HusseinoK (talk · contribs)

Out of scope: low-quality AI-generated images of the White House, the Statue of Liberty, an American flag, Sleeping Beauty Castle at Disneyland, and, oddly, several of Kratos from the video game God of War. The first four are all redundant to many higher-quality photographs, and the latter are clearly derivative works.

Omphalographer (talk) 04:55, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

أنا رفعت ملفات على مقالات تكاد لا تحتوي على هذه الصور أما بالنسبة للدقة فيوجد العديد من هذه الصورة مرفوعة بدقة عالية

مقالة كريتوس كانت لا تحتوي غبر على صورة واحدة فقط

إذا تكررت هذه الشكاوي سأتوقف عن المساعدة في نشر أي صورة أو ملف قد يساعد في تحسين ويكيبيديا و ويكيميديا كومنز HusseinoK (talk) 11:32, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: based on their usage, CSD G3. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 02:41, 19 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 HusseinoK (talk · contribs)

Likely copyvio: these images all look like they were scanned from print media; the uploader's claim of own work seems unlikely. (This is particularly obvious for images like File:نبات المنثور.jpg or File:بطم.jpg, where there's a clearly visible halftone pattern.)

Omphalographer (talk) 02:56, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

أنا أقوم بتصوير النباتات بشكل علمي مع ثماره و أزهاره

لا اعلم ين هي المشكلة

هل ستحذف الصور التي قمت بتصويرها و النباتات التي قمت بشرائها من أجل ويكيبيديا ستكون بلا فائدة!!

ارجوكم لا أريد لتعبي و أموالي التي أنفقتها أن تذهب بلا فائده HusseinoK (talk) 03:04, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(ترجمة جوجل) تبدو هذه الصور وكأنها صور لصفحات من الكتب. هل التقطت صورة للنبات بنفسك، أم التقطت صورة لصورة شخص آخر؟ The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:09, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

يوجد بعضها من كتاب و بعضها من تصويري ولكن الكتاب علمي وهو للإثراء فقط HusseinoK (talk) 03:14, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

anyway if this photos removed I will remove all my work in wikipedia and wikimedia commons

because i buy this plants for this websites and improve them

if this websites don't respcet my i will stop help them and go away

thank you anyway that was beautiful days i don't want to finish them HusseinoK (talk) 03:10, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't lie to us - these are clearly not your own photographs. Some of them, like File:نبات الكتان مع بذره.jpg, are not even photographs; they are paintings! They are all obviously printed on paper; we can see the dots from the printer and the wrinkles in the paper. Omphalographer (talk) 03:19, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

look i told you in another massage their some photos from book i have

please read all my massage i don't won't to missunderstand each other

Sorry BTW cause i send it in two massages

and thank you for your honesty HusseinoK (talk) 03:27, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The photos from the books can't be used because they are likely copyrighted. Uploading them to Commons would constitute a copyright violation. But while you can't upload photos from books, you are welcome to upload photos (of plants) that you have photographed yourself with your own camera or mobile phone. Nakonana (talk) 15:59, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will remove them okay,but i need some days for these, please

i promsie i will remove all photos (all the photos taken from the book)

Just few days(less than five days)

if anything happens,I am responsible for my photos.

if you want a guarantee like my number or something else i am ready HusseinoK (talk) 17:33, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 10:01, 29 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 HusseinoK (talk · contribs)

Not own works, wrong license, no source.

Yann (talk) 10:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Like previous uploads, these all look like scans from print media. Some of them might be old enough to be in the public domain, but we'd need to know the actual sources to determine that. Omphalographer (talk) 10:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

هذه الصور بعضها من مدينتي حماة و القديم منها موجود في ملفات عائلتي لأنها منزلهم القديم و حارتهم

بالمناسبة يمكنك البحث عن الحارة عند العرب و ماذا تعني لهم

ة أما عن الشخصيات فهي صورة كانت مع جدي وكانت اهداء من صديقه في ايام صغرهم يمكنني ان اصور لك الورقة كاملة مع كتاباتهم علبها لتتأكد من ذلك

و اصور الباقية فهي من تصويري و من ملفات ابي القديمة و الصور السابقة التي قمتم بازالتها هي من ملفات ابي ايضا

بالمناسبة شكرا جزيلا على عدم حسن تعاملكم معي HusseinoK (talk) 16:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by HusseinoK (talk · contribs)

User with bad history, small images without EXIF data, unlikely to be own works.

Yann (talk) 10:08, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

شكرا جزيلا على تقييمك السلبي لي بدون سبب

هذه الملفات رغم صغرها وقلة دقتها لكنها تعد من الارث و من الصعب الحصول عليها

الكثير من المستخدمين العرب سيعرفون قيمتها

اعتذر عنك على سلوكك السيء معي وعلى تصرفك المسيء لي HusseinoK (talk) 16:42, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sean at The Lumberjack.webm

It is impossible to review its license. The video is no longer available in Vimeo, also the archived versions that I checked (included the first and the last ones) also show the video is not available Günther Frager (talk) 10:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: That was disappointing. Why couldn't the bot reviewers have passed the review process for every video instantly years ago? - THV | ♂ | U | T - 12:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC); edited: 12:34, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Autobusy PILEA (talk · contribs)

Judging by the watermark on the one and the lack of meaningful exif, these are unlikely to be own work

Gbawden (talk) 10:22, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:The map of Illyria under Bardylis I.png

Incorrect information Albanian Studies (talk) 10:25, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Raumkurve der Elektronenbahn.pdf

Bad file type, dupe of File:Raumkurve der Elektronenbahn.png. Taylor 49 (talk) 10:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:ТУМАНИШВИЛИ.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Խմբագրող as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://bridges.rem33.com/books/Wadbolski_E2.htm, https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=837179365106055&set=ecnf.100064419980397
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as the Facebook-hit is from April this year, whereas our last version was uploaded in 2015, and the other "hit" does not match at all. -- Túrelio (talk) 10:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

in any case, it is obvious, that the file is not original and has no sources, it is just a graphic design. Խմբագրող (talk) 10:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The design is very old. It is a coat of arms of nobility of Georgia that took place until the 19th century when the Russian Empire conquered Georgia and all the Caucasus. It was created before the 19th century. see the coat of arms on the family postal stamp. -- Geagea (talk) 11:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Melikishvili COA.png

This file was initially tagged by Խմբագրող as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://jenikirbyhistory.getarchive.net/topics/coats+of+arms+of+the+nobility+of+georgia, https://noev-kovcheg.ru/mag/2022-08/7766.html
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as 1st hit (https://jenikirbyhistory.getarchive.net/media/melikishvili-coa-5ab0b1) is sourced to Commons (!), and 2nd hit is 7 years younger than our upload. -- Túrelio (talk) 10:34, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

in any case, it is obvious, that the file is not original and has no sources, it is just a graphic design. Խմբագրող (talk) 10:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep? Let me try to approach this with two rationales.

This the coat of arms of a (previously) governing family of Georgia and therefore their coat of arms falls under {{PD-GE-exempt|type=coats of arms}}.
This is a derivative work of a work that is in the public domain (likely due to its age as the family dates back pre-1900). I have found a book published in 1998 that is tagged as Public Domain Mark 1.0 and this coat of arms is depicted in that book on page 174 (see here). There its caption says that this is the family's coat of arms "according V. Tsikhinsky" (in Russian: "по В. Цихинскому"). Page 290 provides the following information on Tsikhinsky: "Цихинский В. Кавказский гербовник. Ч.1. Тавадские роды. Пг., 1922" (Tsikhinsky V. Caucasian Armorial. Part 1. Tavad clans. Petrograd, 1922). The thing is, nothing is known about this Tsikhinsky guy. Gulordava writes (Google translated): "The Caucasian Armorial (hereinafter KG) by V. Tsikhinsky is one of the most important sources on Georgian family heraldry. It was compiled in Petrograd in 1922. Alas, nothing is known about the author himself to this day. The original manuscript is now lost, the "original" is a copy made approximately in the 80s on a copying machine and designed as a small book in hardcover. This "original" copy was given by the Abashidze family in 1993 to a prominent Georgian genealogist, now deputy chairman of the Georgian Genealogical Society (GGS) Mr. I.L. Bichikashvili. An active attempt undertaken by Mr. Bichikashvili to find the original, unfortunately, ended in vain. So, about the KG itself. Before us is the first part of the "Tavad clans" (see Fig. 1), i.e. "princely". Whether there was a second part is unknown." (quote from Гулордава Д.А. «Кавказский гербовник» В. Цихинского // Гербо-вед. – 2000. – № 44. – С. 75 https://gerboved.ru/pdf/Gulordava-2000-Tsikhinsky-pp75-87.pdf)

Does this help to source and license the coat of arms properly? Nakonana (talk) 18:32, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The same coat of arms can also be found on page 131 in an epaper published by heraldika.ge (I don't know what sort of site heraldika.ge is). I don't speak Georgian and unfortunately the document is in a format that can't be translated via machine translation, so all that I can make out of this is that it mentions the year 1864. Nakonana (talk) 19:25, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aralez.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Խմբագրող as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/129337820533877860/
Converted to regular DR to allow for discussion, as Pinterest-hit seems to be undated, whereas our image was uploaded already in 2009. What does the watermark say? -- Túrelio (talk) 10:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The watermark says "Արալեզ Aralez", where the first part is just the name Aralez in Armenian language. And: "13(?).02.2009 Gegart", with Gegart being the username of the uploader.

Keep Looks like an own work by the uploader. Nakonana (talk) 20:18, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Bennguyennnnn (talk · contribs)

User with bad history, small images without EXIF data, unlikely to be own works.

Yann (talk) 11:05, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Littlebodybigh3art123 (talk · contribs)

No EXIF, possible crops of images found elsewhere online given that a version of File:Mason Thames.jpg can be found at https://i.pinimg.com/236x/3e/4f/9a/3e4f9af6b8032d778351e750f507debd.jpg with less cropping.

Belbury (talk) 11:12, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:New Development Bank logo.svg

Likely copyvio. Jonteemil (talk) 11:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Royalrumblebee (talk · contribs)

Small images of people without EXIF data, some look like professional portraits, unlikely to be own works.

Yann (talk) 11:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nomination. I run a reverse search on a couple of them and there were available on the web before the upload:

Günther Frager (talk) 14:15, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One thing must be understood thoroughly. A human being took the pictures and the human being is ME. I am a Photojournalist who have taken many pictures of celebrities and notable personalities. I am providing them for free use and I am wondering why I am being told they are not my own works. This brings up the question: How is this rally being ascertained? By prescience? Then worse, votes seal it. This actually discourages me from releasing my pictures. The massive accumulation of all my pictures for deletion is even bizarre. One by one investigation would have been more civil. Whatever the decision is still okay by me and I take it in good faith. Royalrumblebee (talk) 09:01, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Royalrumblebee: you are uploading photos with low resolution without EXIF, and on top of that they are available on the Web. This doesn't give any evidence that you are the actual photographer, anyone can grab images from the Internet and upload them to Commons. If you are the actual photographer, then please follow the instructions in COM:VRT. And btw, deletion requests are not polls, arguments are what counts, not votes. Günther Frager (talk) 12:25, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nyíregyháza Logo.png

None of evidence this city/town logo under the stated licence. Therefore missing permission. TentingZones1 (talk) 11:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The photo is a public domain. Look at the license.--PeterWikiSK (talk) 19:10, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Entrance to Nintendo Entrance.jpg

{{SD|G2}} Nagomijirap (talk) 12:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Kunsthaus Göttingen

copyright violation; contemporary artworks; no freedom of panorama.

Martin Sg. (talk) 12:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:11 Dine Wiki.jpg

copyright violation; contemporary artworks; no freedom of panorama. Martin Sg. (talk) 12:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Scratch user page. (yes this is mine).png

The user uploaded it as possible self-promotion, and some content is, or may be, copyrighted and not owned by them (the Scratch Cat, which has been deleted from Commons before, an image about Geometry Dash, and the user's icon). Xeroctic (talk) 12:10, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dayr-e Gachin2022-02-26 16.jpg

There is a watermark on the image Mostafameraji (talk) 12:41, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mostafameraji What does this mean? Explain more! {{User|POS78}} ^talk 12:56, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

greetings to you

Under the photo, the profile of the photographer and the news agency is written, which is against the rules of Wikipedia. @POS78 Mostafameraji (talk) 13:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mostafameraji See here and here. This image should be cropped like this image. This deletion request is invalid. {{User|POS78}} ^talk 13:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yes exactly.

It can be cut with the wiki tool. If you cut them I will remove the request. Mostafameraji (talk) 13:43, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done {{User|POS78}} ^talk 13:59, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete

The text on the photo was modified with the wiki-anbar tool. Please do not delete. thanks. (Mostafameraji (talk) 14:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC))[reply]

File:Hiroshi Yamauchi, Nintendo president.jpg

There's no evidence this photo was taken before 1957. In fact, the same photo appears in the 1980 publication 日本の経営者 : 1部上場全企業・社長の経営戦略と人物像昭和56年版, on p. 695. 240B:253:A320:3500:AE0C:84E9:B947:9FFF 13:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rolla, North Dakota Tornado.jpg

This image was created by Sherie Zupan in July 2008 at Rolla, North Dakota. It was first published in the w:Minot Daily News in a story that also covered her encounter with the tornado.[14] The newspaper credits the photo as "submitted" by her.

Zupan was at home at the time, so evidently not an employee of the federal government performing official duties, and there is no other evidence to suggest that the image is ineligible for copyright.

As an image created in the US after 1989, Zupan owned copyright over this photo as soon as she created it. Not that it's required, but the webpage it was published on also carries the notice "© 2008 . All rights reserved" and the linked terms of service state "All information, content, services and software displayed on, transmitted through or used in connection with The Minot Daily News sites, including, but not limited to, news articles, reviews, directories, guides, text, photographs, images, illustrations, audio clips, video, html, source and object code, trademarks, logos and the like, as well as its selection and arrangement, is owned by Ogden Newspapers Inc., and its affiliated companies. You may use the Content online only, and solely for your personal, non-commercial use."

The image seems to have been picked up and syndicated by the Associated Press; for example,[15] and [16]

There is no evidence that Zupan or the AP surrendered the copyright into the public domain. With no evidence of this permission, we must delete under COM:PRP. Rlandmann (talk) 13:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Strong delete per precautionary principle. AP as you know strictly enforces copyright and is not afraid to sue. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 11:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:تصميم امور.jpg

doubtful own work of source drawing, sole upload, useless thumbnail size Pibwl (talk) 13:03, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:خريطة قبائل نجد ، اليمامه ، السعودية ، الكويت ، سلطنة عمان ، الامارات فلسطين ، الاردن ، الشام ، سيناء ، الجنوب ، اليمن.jpg

Copyrighted Materials: no information on the licence Michel Bakni (talk) 13:36, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:عبدالرحمن الوكيل.jpg

Personal photo: out of the scope of the project Michel Bakni (talk) 13:36, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:مروان شتوي.jpg

Personal photo: out of the scope of the project Michel Bakni (talk) 13:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Unveiling of the Kindertransport memorial plaque and bench (5514246578).jpg

Hate to do this, but I don't think even the rather generous FOP in the UK covers a text of this length and originality. Jmabel ! talk 13:49, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where in FoP legislation Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:13, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Pigsonthewing: I believe the UK does not allow FOP for copyrightable text, and clearly this is way over the threshold of being a copyrightable text (which is usually some combination of length and originality, and is determined in specific cases more by case law than statute law). - Jmabel ! talk 18:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - You're restating the deletion nomination, but not answering my question. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:22, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - I'm saying that thresholds of what is copyrightable are almost never stated in statute law, they are matters of case law. But this isn't even close to being under the (very low) UK threshold. The poem by Karen Gershon is certainly copyrightable. @Pigsonthewing: do you doubt that, and think this poem is PD-ineligible? - Jmabel ! talk 21:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      - OK, in what case law is the maximum length of an inscription specified? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:53, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        @Pigsonthewing: I have no idea. Are you seriously saying that you think it is possible that a poem of this length is ineligible for copyright in the UK? - Jmabel ! talk 18:32, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        No. Am I saying that FoP only applies to non-copyrightable content? No. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:42, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        If it is not copyrightable, then FOP is irrelevant. Again: while there is broad FOP in the UK, it does not appear to cover copyrightable text. Therefore this is a copyvio. If you want to keep arguing around the edges of that, go ahead, but I'm done here, and some other admin will ultimately have to close this in any case. - Jmabel ! talk 21:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Haroon-4-Print kopie.jpg

no permission from given photographer see metadata - "Online copyright statement cormooij@xs4all.nl" Hoyanova (talk) 13:51, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This photo has been uploaded on behalve of Haroon Sheikh. R.ramkhelawan (talk) 14:47, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Visuel 1 - jessika gbai.png

As we have already file:JESSIKA LAUREN MACA GBAI, au Championnats d'Afrique d'athlétisme 2024 13.jpg, this file is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 14:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not in use. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 15:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Stewart Memoh (talk · contribs)

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons:What Commons is not#Wikimedia Commons is not your personal free web host. Not used.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Creator:Jo Mora

Creator:Joseph Jacinto Mora already exists. Glrx (talk) 15:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by GLP79 (talk · contribs)

User with bad history, small images without EXIF data, unlikely to be own works.

Yann (talk) 15:10, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jarnsaxa, satélite.jpg

False image (an artwork). In reality, nothing is known about surface features of this satellite, so, the image is pure fiction. Commons is for educational content, not for fakes. Sneeuwschaap (talk) 15:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep COM:INUSE. Edit the description, if you think the fact that it's a speculative artist's creation needs to be stated more clearly. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:09, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:TheFXCharts-Logo.jpg

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 16:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gardenkeeping 2.png

Not my own work, this image comes from another site. This file is a movie poster and is most likely copyrighted. Astrinko (talk) 16:18, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The nominator is NOT the uploader of the file. --Rosenzweig τ 07:39, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Corydoras agassizii 101494981.jpg

This file was copied from my iNat observations in a time period in which the copyright settings were unintentionally changed to CC-BY. Karsten Schönherr (talk) 16:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additional info: I am not the owner of this picture. I can provide you own pictures of the same species (not best quality though) if required. Karsten Schönherr (talk) 16:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kangaroo jack full screen dvd.jpg

Copyvio, DVD Cover still under Copyright Hyperba21 (talk) 16:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Life and works of Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani.jpg

does it even serve COM:SCOPE, although doesn't appear to have much of copyrighted stuff on it, but concerns over SCOPE make me wonder. _Regards,Aafi ^(talk) 16:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep In use. Also I think all book covers in the public domain are in scope. Yann (talk) 17:25, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I have any other concerns. Can be speedily closed as kept. _Regards,Aafi ^(talk) 18:46, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Mohammadmehdimirzaii (talk · contribs)

Copyvion Files taken from the internet

HeminKurdistan (talk) 17:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Simpsons in Catford.. (37171371514).jpg

Fails COM:FAN, the characters in this product are identical to the ones from The Simpsons. Bonus Person (talk) 17:04, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kolten.gif

Duplicate of File:Nat love cowboy.jpg with incorrect metadata and license info Dreamyshade (talk) 17:07, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dad tiger.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Nutshinou as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: per description, from 1965 Detroit Tigers Baseball Yearbook Yann (talk) 17:23, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quite possibly in the public domain due to lack of copyright notice. Yann (talk) 17:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Kingtahmaspsafavi (talk · contribs)

No proof of being a work by Tasnim, no photographer credit, no typical watermark, no indication.

HeminKurdistan (talk) 17:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:SIB Logo 2020-01.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Jonteemil as Logo Latin alphabet calligraphy would be in the public domain. What about Arabic? Yann (talk) 17:28, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Saman daneshi (talk · contribs)

Re-upload of previously deleted files

HeminKurdistan (talk) 17:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eagle Globe and Anchor.jpg

Facebook? 200.39.139.19 18:05, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:El Rastrojon estructure.jpg

claimed free license not seen at link nor at front page of source site. Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Harold Krabs (talk · contribs)

These files are arbitrarily taken from the internet without a proper reasoning for the license used. Iranian law does not rule the photographs to be in the public domain by their "date of creation," rather it is required for a PD file to be "published" +30 years ago. For these files, the information about the author, date of publication, etc. are unknown. As a result, there is no proof that PD-Iran can apply to these cases. Some are possibly not even created by Iranian artists, like the one whose author is acknowledged to be w:Harrison Forman. Per Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle, the freedom of these files are questionable and they should be deleted.

HeminKurdistan (talk) 18:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bahar Atish 02.jpg

Questionable own work claim from the original uploader on en.wiki. Low-quality photograph w/o metadata. HeminKurdistan (talk) 18:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meridix Logo.png

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 18:30, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:TikiLIVE Logo.png

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 18:30, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by RIFAT HOUSE (talk · contribs)

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

Gnomingstuff (talk) 18:33, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:PORCH LOGO.jpg

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 18:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aviral.jpg

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 18:41, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hedra avatar 1724757786788 i26sc36scc.webp

Out of scope: unused, likely AI-generated image of a statue. (The colored irises seem inconsistent with the material of the statue.) Omphalographer (talk) 18:45, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Meriç Bilgiç (Felsefeci).pdf

Out of scope: plain text. To create an encyclopedia article, please read tr:Vikipedi:İlk_maddeniz. Omphalographer (talk) 18:49, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: falls well within the "Excluded education content" part of COM:SCOPE. --bjh21 (talk) 11:57, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am the uploader and the one who requests deletion by mistake. I was actually trying to replace the pdf file with another one. Because the former one was missing a paragraf. I have already replaced it. Now I want to delate my own delition request. Could you please solve the problem? Sincerely Kim Daohm (talk) 11:47, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kim Daohm: This deletion request was opened by Omphalographer, not by you. --bjh21 (talk) 12:32, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Isopropylamin.png

Low quality diagram with many alternatives in Category:Isopropylamine, not used. Wostr (talk) 18:53, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:ВЦСК.jpg

Not his own work, not public domain. Copied from Yandex maps (which were used on another site) - photo credit from 2020 https://yandex.com/maps/org/vitebskiy_tsentralny_sportivny_kompleks/1300145132/gallery/?ll=30.228157%2C55.198371&photos%5Bbusiness%5D=1300145132&photos%5Bid%5D=urn%3Ayandex%3Asprav%3Aphoto%3A9YnTvsiAckTF4CY_vr9olTO-1GcbXKzsh&z=15 Sunpriat (talk) 19:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Mehra9090 (talk · contribs)

No proof of being a work by Tasnim. No watermark, no photographer credit, no indication.

HeminKurdistan (talk) 19:08, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Mehra9090 (talk · contribs)

No proof of being a work by Mojnews (No watermark, no photographer credit, no indication). Plus, Mojnews is no longer freely-licensed.

HeminKurdistan (talk) 19:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Susan Buchser-Lochocki.jpg

Uploaded as own work, when it is very obviously a selfie. The extracted file should go as well. Just Step Sideways (talk) 19:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Tomatofashion (talk · contribs)

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 19:23, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Otakar Hess.png

wrong date, wrong author, wrong source Xocolatl (talk) 19:23, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

its literally a family's friend relalative and we know for sure all those infos are right. I can show you a pic of Otakars old military ID card. Vicdangelis (talk) 19:52, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Please state the year of the military ID card. Thank you Gampe (talk) 03:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)~~[reply]

Sorry, I already found it. --Gampe (talk) 03:15, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, Common beginner errors fixed. --Gampe (talk) 03:08, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep appears to be fixed. --RAN (talk) 18:11, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Color GP.png

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Serikat News (talk · contribs)

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pak Bayu dan Pak Jokowi.jpg

copyright violation, see metadata Xocolatl (talk) 19:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ismayil Dadaşov.png

wrong date - copyright violation? Xocolatl (talk) 19:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kobzx2z spotify pdp.jpg

Ce fichier est issu du profil Spotify de l'artiste, il ne s'agit pas d'un contenu libre de droit, ni d'une création personnelle de la personne l'ayant déposée. A fortiori elle rentre dans la catégorie "photographies promotionnelles" des oeuvres non tolérées sur Commons. Laudgutt (talk) 19:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ticket:2024090110005682 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 19:00, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Roger Sauvage photo.jpg

copyright violation, see source Xocolatl (talk) 19:34, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Republished at website. --RAN (talk) 18:14, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:MrB6482.jpg

wrong author Xocolatl (talk) 19:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Et-sote.jpg

wrong source Xocolatl (talk) 19:42, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noting that Google reverse image search only finds hits for this image that were published after the image was uploaded to Commons. The provided source link, however, is indeed incorrect as it was a link to an online furniture store (I've removed it). If the image is kept, by any chance, then it should be renamed because the current name is the name of said furniture store. Nakonana (talk) 21:22, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:My-eczanem.jpg

wrong source, spam Xocolatl (talk) 19:45, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, it's spam. The image may or may not be free, but it's used to advertise-spam random websites which are given as alleged source for the image and are used as the file name for the image. Also uploaded by newly created single purpose account. Nakonana (talk) 21:28, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nado ragazzo 3.jpg

wrong date, copyright violation? Xocolatl (talk) 19:46, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Hackgence (talk · contribs)

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 20:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cars24 Logo.png

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 20:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete We already had this discussion six years ago: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cars24-Logo.png. I'd also endorse a block for being a spammer. Just Step Sideways (talk) 23:48, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Adriana Faranda.jpg

The source is the Italian newspaper l'Unità and the date is circa 1989 and it is not clear if it is when it was taken or published. If it was published after March 1, 1989, then it is copyrighted in the USA due to Berne Convention. If it was published prior to that date, then its US copyright was restored in 1996 at URAA time. In both cases the photo is clearly protected in the US. Following COM:PCP we cannot keep this image. Günther Frager (talk) 20:13, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Java-Ahamed (talk · contribs)

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 20:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Pcuniversalz (talk · contribs)

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 20:17, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Legan Import Logopng2.png

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 20:22, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Sa090 (talk · contribs)

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 20:25, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:March 1990 Hesston Kansas tornado.jpg

This photo was taken in Kansas in March 1990.

It was published on the front page of w:The Wichita Eagle on Wednesday, March 14, 1990 and credited to "Dave Williams/The Wichita Eagle "[17] (Williams is credited on many Wichita Eagle photos, so appears to have been staff).

There is no indication that Williams was working as an employee of the US Federal Government or that the photo is ineligible for copyright for any other reason.

As a photo taken in the US after 1989, copyright existed in this photo when it was created. However, the newspaper also included this copyright notice on page 2: "The entire contents of each issue of The Wichita Eagle are protected under the federal copyright law. Reproduction of any portion will not be permitted without our express permission."[18]

There is no evidence that the Wichita Eagle surrendered this copyright. Rlandmann (talk) 21:23, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Delete per precautionary principle. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 11:03, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per below rationale. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs) 23:32, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep — The photo was uploaded from this (dead, now archived) NWS webpage. My reasoning for keeping this image is explained below:

At the bottom of the webpage, there is a disclaimer button. According to that (archived) general disclaimer: “The information on government servers are in the public domain, unless specifically annotated otherwise, and may be used freely by the public”.
For the clause of “specifically annotated otherwise”, NWS either allows the user to add a copyright “©” watermark to the image {as seen in this image, hosted on this NWS webpage} or by directly adding a copyright statement using “©” {as seen on this NWS webpage: difference between the “Tornado Photos” and “Damage” tabs}. That disclaimer is linked at the bottom of all three of the NWS webpages linked above (this image’s webpage + 2 I used as examples). To me, “specifically annotated otherwise” indicates a direct copyright (©) statement or watermark.
The Commons has previously (and recently) kept files based on the NWS general disclaimer. A recently closed deletion request (closed September 2024) for a file under the PD-NWS template was closed as keep with the main keep rational being the NWS general disclaimer.
The National Weather Service has also used this image on a post on X (formerly Twitter), with no link-based attribution as recently as March 2024.
The Harvey County Historical Museum (i.e. the respective local county history museum where the tornado occurred) uses this photo in this article where it is attributed “Licensed under Public Domain”.

Based on all of that evidence above, I must support keeping this photo. WeatherWriter (talk) 11:51, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Grand anse.webp

Appears to be a stock photo, credited to Alamy by National Geographic; no evidence of free license Gnomingstuff (talk) 21:52, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fletcher-Profile-Pic-tmp1.jpg

Delete Taken and cropped from the player's website at https://fletcherwestphal.com/about (direct link). While the uploader is "Westphal65" there's no proof provided that this person is the copyright holder of the image and therefore has the right to release the image under the here stipulated cc-by-sa-4.0 license. Website is clearly marked as Copyright 2024, all rights reserved. Copyright violation. Hammersoft (talk) 21:52, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello --- It appears the issue for using the photo of Fletcher is a copyright. How do I show/use a photo that I have personally taken and approve its use on Wiki? Westphal65 (talk) 09:57, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Commons:Volunteer Response Team. --Hammersoft (talk) 11:47, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:JUST PAYON.webp

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by likely company rep; no usage outside sandbox, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 21:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bintaro Plaza Jaya.webp

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by shop; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 21:55, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:180Smoke Logo.webp

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by likely company rep; no usage outside sandbox, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 21:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Topklickz.webp

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 21:59, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rick and Morty door.jpg

Fails COM:FAN, this mural depicts two copyrighted characters (Rick and Morty) in detail and is directly copied from a frame from the first episode of Rick and Morty (https://www.one37pm.com/popular-culture/shows-like-rick-and-morty). Its derivative file should also be deleted for the same reasons. Bonus Person (talk) 21:59, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Menudi banner.webp

COM:SPAM, self promotional image; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:06, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Sha89sha (talk · contribs)

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:08, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Limapagi Network (talk · contribs)

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:13, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:لوكو اريدو.png

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:15, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logo TM Forum.jpg

COM:SPAM, promotional image uploaded by company; no usage, out of scope Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:16, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:For Monika Bellucci From Martynas Pliopa.jpg

almost certainly copyvio stock image - tineye came up empty but user has uploaded several other similar photos all of which were stock Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Tiagodefreitas90 (talk · contribs)

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Valentinoegz (talk · contribs)

COM:SPAM, promotional images uploaded by likely company rep; no usage, out of scope

Gnomingstuff (talk) 22:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Le pied du bonheur Guinée.jpg

aucune importance, c'etait pour le teste commons Aboubacarkhoraa (talk) 22:25, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Baptiste Hervin au Playground Duperré.jpg

J'ai voulu savoir comment ajouter une image sur Wikipédia par pure curiosité, il y a quelques années. Bapt hrvn (talk) 22:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

J'ai voulu savoir comment mettre une image sur Wikipédia par pure curiosité. Malheureusement, cela me joue des tours actuellement, et ce, même en nuisant mes projets professionnels. Merci de bien vouloir supprimer ce fichier de la plateforme Wikipédia.$ Bapt hrvn (talk) 22:32, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be willing to upload and give a Creative Commons license to a recent selfie? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:38, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Léon.svg

A better picture exists -Zardoz91 (talk) 19:32, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Léon.svg

A better picture exists Zardoz91 (talk) 21:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC) {subst:delete2|image=File:Léon.svg|reason=A better picture exists}} Zardoz91 (talk) 20:37, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]