Commons:Deletion requests/2024/07/30

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

July 30

[edit]

There is no commercial Freedom of Panorama in Belarus. Multiple architects were involved in this work as per w:be:Палац Рэспублікі (Мінск), several of them still alive (M. Pirogov just died last year). So these commercially-licensed images are all infringements to the architectural copyright. Building dates to 1997.

Note that the oldest images of the building were deleted at Commons:Deletion requests/New Buildings and Memorials of Belarus, part 1.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:25, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


About the photo: BLR Minsk Point Zero of Mapping in Belarus 2.jpg. I found this photo from Flickr about 15 years ago, it was with open license at that point. Based on the composition, the zero point mark is the issue in this photo. The building is not so important, is is not the main theme, just on the background (showing location). Thus that can be blurred or replaced with a box showing location of a building, or partly cut away (e.g. the top of it) if that makes it street legal. Modification suggested. Would that do? --Paju~commonswiki (talk) 00:37, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Paju~commonswiki can be, but would the mapping marker there be a problem too? Unless its designer died more than 70 years ago. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:06, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, thanks. Point Zero of Mapping monument (1998) was designed by A. Sardanov, A. Finsk and V. Zavedejev. Thus, I made a local copy if this file to fiwiki, and the photo was already used in fi.wikipedia.org with proper citation approach, i.e. giving credits to the artists, mentioning their names, using published sources. Thus (because of the Palace of Republic, 2001) credits go also to architects M. Pirogov, supported by V. Danilov, L. Zdanevitš, L. Moskalevitš, V. Novikov, N. Turljuk, V. Usimov & A. Šabalin (I picked these from fiwiki article; names are written with Finnish translit. standard and not that of proper English. This can be seen e.g. in letters tš, Š and ju).--Paju~commonswiki (talk) 01:53, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Sahaib as no permission (No permission) Krd 04:23, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Sahaib as no permission (No permission) Krd 04:23, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Logo likely to be above COM:TOO A1Cafel (talk) 04:34, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative work of a copyrighted screen A1Cafel (talk) 04:38, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No freedom of panorama in Monaco A1Cafel (talk) 05:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


 Keep That means thousands of other pictures in France and Monaco need to be deleted as well? Ridiculous. Renek78 (talk) 05:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete, per w:en:Yacht Club de Monaco, work was completed in 2014 and authored by Foster + Partners. Renek78's claim is irrelevant here: we commonly delete copyrighted architecture and public art from countries that do not allow commercial Freedom of Panorama. If the Monégasque politicians' mindset is the same as most of the French politicians' (not open to have their recent buildings exploited commercially by the American netizens and content creators without permissions from architects), then this yacht club building is off-limits on Wikimedia Commons. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 15:39, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio? Zumindest muss darüber geredet werden, auch wenn die Latte tief hängt (Schöpfungshöhe) GerritR (talk) 05:44, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image was never reviewed and at the source, the license today is CC BY NC ND 4.0 Leoboudv (talk) 08:15, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strange, It was CC0 when it was move to commons. Awkwafaba (talk) 15:22, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Murals of NetworkArts by User:N-gio (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Derivative work of copyrighted artwork. The United States does not provide Freedom of Panorama for public art. The work was made in 2000 by a group called NetworkArts.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


"It is the policy of the Journal of Duhok University to own the copyright of the technical contributions. " https://journal.uod.ac/index.php/uodjournal/article/view/2034 HeminKurdistan (talk) 12:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a look at the copyright here, the book refers to Salahaddin University-Erbil, not Duhok University, I puted this link-source only to refer the book page for the file. I don't know why there is "Duhok University", + I have indicated the name of the creator and author. Must I have made a mistake in setting the file source? Zamand Karim (talk) 13:46, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article has been published by the Journal of University of Duhok, which has a copyright notice on its website. For your information, Salahaddin University-Erbil is the author's affiliation and the link you provided also has a copyright notice: "Copyright (c) 2023 Baraat Ismael FaqeAbdulla". HeminKurdistan (talk) 13:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@HeminKurdistan: but there is also this: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. If I give the author proper credit and provide a link to the license, which I have done. Zamand Karim (talk) 14:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Non-commercial restrictions are not compatible with Commons copyright policy. Please see Commons:Licensing. Omphalographer (talk) 21:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Plus, your link is about this: "Exaggerating And Hyperbolic Expressions in Northern Kurmanji with Reference to English: A Socio- Pragmatic Approach", but the subject of my file is: "Hyperbole as a Way of Showing Eager Toward a Lover in Hamay Mamle's and Hasan Zirak's Songs", ofcourse I made a mistake in putting the source. Zamand Karim (talk) 13:57, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First and foremost, when there are contradicting copyright notices, on Commons we take the one reserving more rights as granted. Secondly, the website clearly says "Except where otherwise noted..." which applies to this notice: "Copyright (c) 2023 Baraat Ismael FaqeAbdulla". HeminKurdistan (talk) 14:39, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not so hard to create a pie chart on wikis, you can also upload your own file. HeminKurdistan (talk) 14:40, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, can I put my own chart on the same file? Zamand Karim (talk) 14:57, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence that this particular screencap was taken by a Philippine Sports Commission employee from the source interview video. License would be appropriate on parts where Elreen Ando is being spoken to by the interviewer. Hariboneagle927 (talk) 13:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP. Photo taken in private property and uploaded without permission from the property owner (Ateneo de Zamboanga University). Raymondsiyluy05 (talk) 14:10, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The logo was previously nominated for deletion and kept, because this was bulk DR for mostly Mexican logos and in Mexico the logo is not copyrighted. This is logo from Honduras and we have no information about threshold of originality in Honduras. The logo does not consist of simple geometrical figures and in my opinion the logo is copyrighted in Honduras. Taivo (talk) 14:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph by Ahmad Kavousian, on sale on Getty Images w/o any information on prior release [1]. No proof of being made publicly available inside Iran more than 30 years ago. HeminKurdistan (talk) 14:35, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plik słabszej jakości od identycznego File:Stanisław Tyszka MEP (2024).jpg Stanisław Krupiński (talk) 15:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Plik słabszej jakości od identycznego File:Ewa Zajączkowska-Hernik MEP (2024).jpg Stanisław Krupiński (talk) 15:17, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Plik słabszej jakości od identycznego File:Anna Bryłka MEP (2024).jpg Stanisław Krupiński (talk) 15:18, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Way too recent as a bulding/structure in order to fall out of copyrights, since there's no FOP in Greece. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 15:43, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Way too recent as a bulding/structure in order to fall out of copyrights, since there's no FOP in Greece. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 15:43, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Re: File:Αρχηγείο ΕΥΠ 3.jpg

Well, sorry for creating more work for you that you have to correct. I thought this would not apply for photos that are my own work. Greek law pretaining copyright for public buildings etc. is really complicated as far as I have researched. Could you be so kind to inform me of the years needed to pass for the copyright to be lifted? For example in this case the building was completed in 1978. How many years have to pass?...

Thank you. --Michail Angelos Georgoulas (talk) 19:15, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Way too recent as a bulding/structure in order to fall out of copyrights, since there's no FOP in Greece. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 15:43, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. 𝓣𝓱𝓮 𝓫𝓾𝓲𝓵𝓭𝓲𝓷𝓰 𝓲𝓼 𝓷𝓸𝓽 𝓲𝓷 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓯𝓲𝓻𝓼𝓽 𝓹𝓵𝓪𝓷. 186.172.135.76 20:46, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


This image is both low quality compared to others we have in Category:Female human genitalia (and subcategories) and has no camera metadata, indicating that it might not be own work as claimed. Elli (talk) 17:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copy of File:Logo Linea 6 Napoli.svg Yeagvr (talk) 17:57, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

© Keuze.nl 2024 ... so not CCbySA4.0 SexMad (talk) 19:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Jug1212 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Likely not own works. Definitely not the Josh and Bobby one which seems to be a selfie.

SDudley (talk) 19:23, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This photo of product packaging contains a copyrighted design. RandomKatze (talk) 20:17, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Logo is from 2005. This is used on the en-wikipedia page Dr Pepper. I'm not sure how the deletion procedure works, as the rule pages only seem to say what should be deleted, but as wikipedia allows fair-use under some conditions and this page is relatively important the image should be reuploaded there if this is deleted. (I think this should be deleted, sorry <redacted who brought this up to me>). Same for other images; searching up various brand names reveal lots of similar images with soda logos, which might be speedy deleted + reuploaded in the future.  AltoStev  Talk 17:20, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]