Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2016/02/12

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

This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests.

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Archive
Archive February 12th, 2016
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.

derivated image from copyright logo from 8th wonder of the world contest ElGatoSaez (talk) 02:44, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 09:37, 12 February 2016 (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.

I uploaded these terrible versions before I found a decent original, which I uploaded at File:Servicio Geológico Mexicano logo.png, and I'd like that to take the place of this one. Gorthian (talk) 07:41, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 09:36, 12 February 2016 (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.

wrong category for licensing category Juno.nxn (talk) 08:07, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Speedily deleted per COM:SCREENSHOT, 'free to play' game is not freely licensed. --Revent (talk) 08:49, 12 February 2016 (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.

wrong author Juno.nxn (talk) 08:08, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Speedily (per tag on page) as an uploader requested deletion of new unused file. --Revent (talk) 08:44, 12 February 2016 (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.

wrong author Juno.nxn (talk) 08:08, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Speedily deleted as a reported apparent copyvio, seperate from this request. --Revent (talk) 08:43, 12 February 2016 (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.

You cannot include this fun star icon in the collage because it is licensed under the GNU General Public License (Commons:Collages). Sismarinho (talk) 16:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyvio. --Thibaut120094 (talk) 16:25, 12 February 2016 (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.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Denniss (talk) 19:32, 12 February 2016 (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.

Promotional page, and there is no reason to keep this on the site. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:27, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Denniss (talk) 19:36, 12 February 2016 (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.

author or uploader request deletion Span320 (talk) 15:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:10, 13 February 2016 (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.

It does not seem possible that this 1967 news image black and white is the own work of the uploader on 4 April 2013. More information is needed. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:48, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:19, 13 February 2016 (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.

There is no indication of user's own work on this image described as being from 1938 in the description, yet dated to 2013 and "own work" of uploader. More information is needed about the provenance of this image. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:49, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:20, 13 February 2016 (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.

Composite images require that both base images be separately uploaded to Commons and properly licensed. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:20, 13 February 2016 (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.

non-free logo, from http://www.kardindia.com/ Diannaa (talk) 16:05, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:30, 13 February 2016 (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.

Photgraph may be own work, there's no indication the sculpture is. COM:COPYVIO without COM:OTRS from the sculptor. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:03, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:40, 13 February 2016 (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.

Photgraph may be own work, there's no indication the sculpture is. COM:COPYVIO without COM:OTRS from the sculptor. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:03, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:41, 13 February 2016 (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 Brian.flamm (talk · contribs)

[edit]

No confidence that any of these variably sized, different quality, apparently professional images are the own work of the uploader. There are only two photos taken with same camera, the other three with metadata are from different cameras - none of the other images has Exif. Similar topic of uploads suggests internet culling with "self" license.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:11, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:46, 13 February 2016 (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.

Outside of project scope, not in use anywhere. Also potential copyvio. Liance (talk) 22:01, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: clear copyright violation. --JuTa 22:19, 12 February 2016 (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.

Out of scope — Racconish ☎ 16:40, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Christian Ferrer: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing

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.

Out of scope — Racconish ☎ 16:41, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Christian Ferrer: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing

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.

Out of scope — Racconish ☎ 16:41, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Christian Ferrer: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing

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.

Image non conforme 194.150.40.231 10:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: DR for a DR???. --JuTa 14:31, 14 February 2016 (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.

seems to be copyright violation: http://www.indietraveller.co/ice-caves-in-iceland/ ProfessorX (talk) 20:32, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by Ellin Beltz; DR closed by Josve05a (talk) 09:59, 15 February 2016 (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.

Potential copyvio: the image was lifted from a Pixabay account with a single upload which lists it as a public domain image, yet it also appears in a professional photographer's copyrighted portfolio (unrelated to the Pixabay account) as "Brian Cameron, businessman". McGeddon (talk) 19:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --99of9 (talk) 01:08, 17 February 2016 (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.

Originally uploaded by Plaid Cymru, so not a clear-cut copyright violation as first appeared. However, there are still issues regarding the right-hand image. Composite image from here on 12 August 2015 (five days before upload here). Source of right-hand image is crop of one credited to "Petros Giannakouris/AP/PA" and in widespread use in June 2015, including (for example) here.

It's also notable that the composite appears to match the format of other twinned-up images on the Wales Online page, implying that Wales Online themselves (rather than the uploaders) created the composite for their own use.

Can the original uploaders please clarify that *both* images are clearly usable under a free license (and that they own and/or have the right to offer both images under that license!)?

Ubcule (talk) 19:33, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Automated translation (apologies for the quality, I don't speak Welsh):
"llwytho i fyny yn wreiddiol gan Blaid Cymru, felly yn ymddangos nid yn torri hawlfraint clir-dorri fel gyntaf. Fodd bynnag, mae materion yn ymwneud â'r ddelwedd dde yn dal i fod.
Delwedd cyfansawdd o hyn ymlaen 12 Awst, 2015 (pum niwrnod cyn ei lwytho fan hyn). Ffynhonnell y ddelwedd gywir-law yn gnwd o un gredydu i "Petros Giannakouris / AP / PA" ac yn cael ei ddefnyddio yn eang ym mis Mehefin 2015, gan gynnwys (er enghraifft) fan hyn. [1]
Mae hefyd yn werth nodi bod y cyfansawdd yn ymddangos i gyd-fynd â'r fformat o ddelweddau eraill gefeillio-i fyny ar y dudalen Online Cymru, gan awgrymu bod Cymru Ar-lein eu hunain (yn hytrach na'r uploaders) greodd y cyfansawdd ar gyfer eu defnydd eu hunain.
A all y uploaders gwreiddiol os gwelwch yn dda egluro bod y ddau delweddau * * yn amlwg y gellir ei ddefnyddio o dan drwydded am ddim (ac y maent yn berchen a / neu sydd â'r hawl i gynnig y ddau delweddau o dan y drwydded honno!)?"
Ubcule (talk) 20:09, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, well spotted; our error. Please crop and leave out the flag. Plaid Cymru Swyddogol (talk) 10:50, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks for the explanation. I'm assuming you're the rights holder to the left-hand image. I've cropped the flag out of the current version and asked for the previous versions to be removed from the history. Ubcule (talk) 16:13, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Vote keep now (i.e. consider my nomination withdrawn) but please remove the old versions discussed above. Ubcule (talk) 14:09, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Problematic content hidden. However, OTRS needed. --Common Good (talk) 09:58, 17 February 2016 (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.

Commons isn't your private web host. Sismarinho (talk) 16:12, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyvio. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 04:17, 18 February 2016 (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 حسن شاكوش (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF, different watermarks by the original photographers (like File:2016gfgfgdf.jpg or File:Gffrgt.jpg). Uploaded in a row on 02.02.2016. Nonsense titles & descriptions. Uploader related: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ghjtyu6y7u6.jpg

Gunnex (talk) 10:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --PierreSelim (talk) 07:19, 19 February 2016 (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.

terrible quality, 2 better alternatives (File:Alpha-methylstyrene.png, File:Alpha-methylstyrol.svg) Rhadamante (talk) 00:16, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:16, 19 February 2016 (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 of User:Uw17

[edit]

These images were all uploaded by User:Uw17. There are several suspicious factors:

  • first two uploads (1 + 2) were deleted by Yann for Copyright violatons. A few days later he continued with uploading,
  • images through the years are from all around the world – Prague, Tokyo, Melbourne, Paris, Indian Wells, Cincinnati, London, Toronto, Belgrade,
  • every one event is represented only single image, excepting two files of Indian Wells and French Open,
  • missing EXIF – deleted metadata (?)

For me, it's very unreliable. I suppose that Uw17 should have more images from these events and try to upload them with EXIF. Otherwise to delete all.--Kacir (talk) 00:26, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:16, 19 February 2016 (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.

Private image/Photographs of identifiable people 최광모 (talk) 00:37, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Also probably infringes on copyright for tiger sculpture. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:17, 19 February 2016 (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.

Private image/Photographs of identifiable people 최광모 (talk) 00:37, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Infringes on copyright for tiger scupture. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:18, 19 February 2016 (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.

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Related ptwiki entry speedy deleted. Gunnex (talk) 08:02, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:57, 19 February 2016 (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 Mbapoficial (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used.

Gunnex (talk) 08:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:56, 19 February 2016 (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.

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 08:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:57, 19 February 2016 (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.

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 08:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:57, 19 February 2016 (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 Smehdit (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent (Facebook) resolutions, missing EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Smehdit (serial copyright violator/file cropper) and mysteriously watermarked files like File:Royam9.jpg + File:Royam8.jpg + etc.

Gunnex (talk) 09:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:57, 19 February 2016 (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.

ouzt of scope, rapspam Nolispanmo 09:28, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:57, 19 February 2016 (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 Quentin Alfosterrico (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Six various sized, white balanced, focused, and etc. files, with no metadata, but for one image which is small and of poor quality. User's other images were "no source".

Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:34, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:58, 19 February 2016 (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 Llzz77 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

No confidence that these variably sized, low quality images which - if they contain metadata - are so small that the metadata tag is apparently attached to the file when it was taken from teh internet. The gallery is a series of images of soccer/football stadiums and men's faces.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:02, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:59, 19 February 2016 (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 Nfkl (talk · contribs)

[edit]

No confidence that any of the images in this uploader's collection are own work of the uploader: No metadata, small sizes, variable sizes, some Facebook size, and so on make it very hard to believe that this group of dissimilar images was created by the same person.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:09, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:00, 19 February 2016 (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.

Derivative works on posters and photograph in this image. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:12, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:00, 19 February 2016 (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 SANTAMUERTEKS (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Promotional uploads of various sources, see no metadata, odd sizes and so on. Apparently COM:COPYVIOs culled from the internet.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:00, 19 February 2016 (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 Jessiebrownjb (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope and/or unused personal images.

Ubcule (talk) 22:20, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:05, 19 February 2016 (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 Tobolsk fan (talk · contribs)

[edit]

No indication of user's own work on these images, two from the 50s and 60s, one team shot and two pictures of football/soccer players, all different sizes, no camera data, probable COM:COPYVIOs.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:24, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Если на это наткнулся кто-то русскоговорящий

[edit]

Я просто дико туплю и не понимаю, что от меня хотят. Я градостроитель, а не гуманитарий. Для меня всё это - тёмный лес. И без того было пыткой окунутся в недра пусть и столь простого, но таки программирования. Черканите пару строк, будьте любезны, в чём я не прав. Спасибо!

--Tobolsk fan (talk) 09:51, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1. My photos whose source code has not been preserved. Preserved only album the group in the social network VKontakte сыылонька, from where it was taken. I agree that it is necessary to change the license.

2 and 3. The work of press photographers of the newspaper "Tobolsk pravda" that free photograph and post photos from the matches of FC "Tobol" in the social network VKontakte ссылка на ВК

--Tobolsk fan (talk) 09:44, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

These photos were in the family archive. Who they are in the archive of the museum of the city police, which is owned by my father. Scanned by me with the permission of my father specifically for the article about the football club "Tobol".

--Tobolsk fan (talk) 09:32, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:05, 19 February 2016 (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.

Copyright violation. This picture can be found here, for instance: [2]. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 00:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: likely copyright violation. --Ymblanter (talk) 21:22, 19 February 2016 (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.

Unused logo. No clear scope. Josve05a (talk) 01:30, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 21:23, 19 February 2016 (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.

This images do not have any context and looked spammy Thatonewikiguy (talk) 02:08, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 21:24, 19 February 2016 (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.

now obsolete (File:Asphalten.svg) Kopiersperre (talk) 09:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --DMacks (talk) 22:47, 19 February 2016 (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.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:26, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: and no license at all. --JuTa 01:40, 20 February 2016 (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.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:28, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: and no license at all. --JuTa 02:09, 20 February 2016 (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.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:29, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: and no license at all. --JuTa 01:51, 20 February 2016 (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.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused map of questionable notability. Should be in MediaWiki map or SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:32, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: likely not own work of the uploader. --JuTa 02:24, 20 February 2016 (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.

The uploader didnt provide a real source of rights from the photo, this could be copyrighted. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 02:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: clear copyright violation. --JuTa 10:57, 21 February 2016 (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.

Doit à la personne physique Peter Klasen souhaite faire disparaitre cette image 194.150.40.231 10:54, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Klasen souhaiterait exercer son Droit à l'image (sur sa personne physique) et faire retirer définitivement cette image non conforme à ses souhaits. Merci de votre compréhension. 194.150.40.231 10:05, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: We rarely remove images at the request of the subject, still more rarely when the image is in use, and never on request from an anonymous IP editor. Klasen may request this removal by sending a message himself to OTRS and a decision will be made there. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:14, 22 February 2016 (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.

Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:44, 25 February 2016 (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.

image from goverment site with copyright 181.228.104.10 18:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

En Argentina hay gobiernos nacionales (casa rosada) y provinciales. Esta imagen proviene de un sitio web provincial. --181.228.104.10 09:50, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.expedientepolitico.com.ar/wp-content/uploads/alic.jpg

CHILENO MALA LECHE: NO HABLES SI NO SABES


Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 17:39, 26 February 2016 (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.

Superseded by Coconut icon.svg. — TintoMeches, 01:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:33, 29 February 2016 (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.

Duplicate images as this one WebAppsTeamFall2013 Thatonewikiguy (talk) 02:14, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:32, 29 February 2016 (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.

Probably not own, higher resolutions can be found in google Rodrigolopes (talk) 02:23, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:34, 29 February 2016 (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.

Not educational nudity 217.160.167.81 03:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Commons is not an amateur porn site and images must be realistically usable for educational purposes. It might be irrelevant that it was uploaded for exhibitionist purposes (as username "Thatsmallcock" seems to imply) if it was useful. However, we have more than enough images of genitalia of all shapes and sizes with far higher image quality than these ones. (See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:000 Erect penis.jpg). Ubcule (talk) 17:02, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: deleted by Denniss. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:41, 29 February 2016 (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.

Nudity, not educational picture 217.160.167.81 03:33, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Commons is not an amateur porn site and images must be realistically usable for educational purposes. It might be irrelevant that it was uploaded for exhibitionist purposes (as username "Thatsmallcock" seems to imply) if it was useful. However, we have more than enough images of genitalia of all shapes and sizes with far higher image quality than these ones. (See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:00 A masturbating male.jpg). Ubcule (talk) 17:01, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: deleted by Denniss. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:42, 29 February 2016 (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.

Bad quality 217.160.167.81 03:34, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, unused bad quality image of unknow people : out of scope. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:44, 29 February 2016 (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 Sharonlin8296 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Agency or editorial photos with no credible claim of ownership or permission

Ytoyoda (talk) 03:38, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, images can be found previously published on the web. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:47, 29 February 2016 (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.

Nudity, not educational picture 217.160.167.81 03:49, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Commons is not an amateur porn site and images must be realistically usable for educational purposes. We have more than enough images of breasts of all shapes and sizes with higher image quality than these ones. (See all requests associated with user's uploads). Ubcule (talk) 17:08, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:49, 29 February 2016 (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.

Nudity, not educational picture, bad quality 217.160.167.81 03:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Commons is not an amateur porn site and images must be realistically usable for educational purposes. We have more than enough images of genitalia of all shapes and sizes with higher image quality than these ones. (See all requests associated with user's uploads). Ubcule (talk) 17:07, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:49, 29 February 2016 (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.

Nudity, not educational picture 217.160.167.81 03:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Commons is not an amateur porn site and images must be realistically usable for educational purposes. We have more than enough images of genitalia of all shapes and sizes with higher image quality than these ones. (See all requests associated with user's uploads). Ubcule (talk) 17:06, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:50, 29 February 2016 (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.

Does not belong om Boston Terrier page. Obviously a prank 76.103.243.90 04:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Some self-identified comedy "genius's" idea of a joke. Out of scope. Ubcule (talk) 17:24, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: out of scope. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:51, 29 February 2016 (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.

At least one image in this montage appears to be a non-free image: the goddess (Chowdeshwari / Sowdeshwari) image is found on several websites [3][4][5]. Utcursch (talk) 05:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, photomontage without sources. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:52, 29 February 2016 (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.

unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:49, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:56, 29 February 2016 (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.

unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:56, 29 February 2016 (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.

unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:56, 29 February 2016 (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 Josecast19 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unused personal photos, out of scope

Mjrmtg (talk) 11:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:57, 29 February 2016 (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.

unused personal photos, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:57, 29 February 2016 (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.

Derivative of painting likely still in copyright. Storkk (talk) 12:30, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, artist died in 1988 https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Delpech. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:04, 29 February 2016 (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.

こんにちは、byo_2016と申します。浦和別所.JPGの道路左側の住宅は弊社社員の個人宅であり、浦和地区に関する検索をする度に自分の住居が表示される事に不安を感じております。どうぞご理解とご協力を頂けますようお願い申し上げます。 Byo 2016 (talk) 10:30, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Riley Huntley (talk) 08:59, 2 March 2016 (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.

Commons:Deletion requests/File:浦和別所.JPGの事情に配慮し、削除お願い致します。Mistook photo. my uploading.--Kamaura (talk) 14:18, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per previous DR. If you wish to renominate for deletion, consider following Commons:Courtesy deletions/2#General grounds for removal request. 再び削除を依頼する場合は Commons:Courtesy deletions/2#General grounds for removal request に従うことをご検討ください. --Yasu (talk) 15:32, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

As Kalliope (WMF) has threatened to block administrator accounts that are seen to "assist" Russavia (Russavia specifically, as these circumstances and interpretation of WMF policies only apply to his case), this is reasonably interpreted as a threat to office lock the accounts of any Wikimedia Commons contributor who appears to assist Russavia in any way. The files must be deleted and may then reinstated by a Commons administrator, who then takes personal responsibility for the undeleted files, rather than me. This will leave me free to continue to work with the undeleted files. Note that the WMF threat is phrased in a way that makes undeletion an issue rather than reupload. If a literal reupload is a requirement by the WMF, then we may need to find a way of preserving the image pages texts, with their unique categorization and descriptions, and the upload URI source, then mass reuploading as clean uploads with all possible reference to Russavia's work wiped from history. This will lose improvements to the files such as the cropping of credit bars and removal of watermarks, and as some files will no longer be available on the given link, they are likely to remain lost to the project.

Though later comments by Kalliope on COM:AN/U have qualified this to be interpreted as for "post-ban" actions that may be interpreted as assisting Russavia, this leaves me personally with a serious issue of how I can apply "housekeeping" actions by Faebot in maintaining my own uploads, where in the past I have worked collegiately with Russavia, and may still receive requests from Russavia or those he has worked with to release educational collections of photographs. In the case of the Airliners batch upload project, Russavia worked directly with photographers to secure the releases, most of which are documented as OTRS records. Further improvements to categorization, identification and the use of the custom template have been working collegiately with Russavia to the benefit of Wikimedia content, up until the point of the threat by Kalliope to block anyone that may be perceived by the WMF to assist Russavia. As there is no possibility of appeal, nor any right to challenge evidence for such a block, all Commons contributors should take steps to protect themselves from becoming suspects.

This is a test case of 70,168 photographs currently marked in Category:Files uploaded in cooperation with blocked accounts, the results of this DR I would apply to other batch uploads where Russavia has been part of the team in various ways. This selection does not represent all photographs from the Airliners project, just those where I was the mass uploader, so it may be a sensible precaution to take the same action with files in the project uploaded by other users.

Refer to diff: "This is why it is the un-deletion of such content that can be seen as assisting the banned user in evading their ban and thus have repercussions, rather than its re-uploading by a contributor who is not banned and assumes responsibility for the upload."

The following list is a sample of the first 100 files in the category:

(talk) 11:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep: What is more disruptive? The block evasion by Russavia (and previous actions that the WMF diskliked), or the attemp of the WMF to disrupt Commons by trying to get rid thousand of good contributions (including the Picture of the Year 2014), just because them was uploaded by a banned user? As I know, Blocked/banned user has never been a valid reason to delete files if them are in scope. Therefore, the files should not be part the asisting banned users issue as well as the users who dealing with these files, because the files belongs to the Community. --Amitie 10g (talk) 17:24, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
PD: I already read the whole thread at the COM:ANU, and I still keeping my  Keep comment. This is one of the most ridiculous and shameful thing that I seen in my life in the Wikimedia Community, and we should not accept the interest of the WMF if them contradicts the interest of the Community. --Amitie 10g (talk) 20:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Why do we need to delete them? Because they were uploaded by a banned user? Isn't Commons' mission is to provide a free media repository for everyone? If the WMF will just delete these, then they will just destroy Commons' mission. And if they will delete these, I will demand them to restore them and give a public apology to our community. My question to the WMF is: Do you even cared about us? -- Poké95 00:51, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Strong consensus to keep. --Riley Huntley (talk) 09:01, 2 March 2016 (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.
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.

No freedom of panorama for modern monuments in Russia Ymblanter (talk) 12:05, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP in Russia for modern sculptures Ymblanter (talk) 14:23, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Green Giant (talk) 21:59, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Green Giant (talk) 22:00, 2 March 2016 (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.

Unfortunately, there is no Freedom of Panorama in France. This church was built between 1942 and 1962 and frwiki states the architect was fr:Henri Gillard, who died in 1979. Artworks within all appear too modern to be PD as well.

Storkk (talk) 12:33, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but it's wrong. Gillard has only repaired it. An heavy repair, indeed, but not a new building, as you can see on this old picture. Moreover, Gillard was only authorizing the work, not the architect. Their beneficiaries therefore have no interest in this building. - Bzh-99 (talk) 18:20, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
EDIT : On the other side, indeed, furnishings and frescoes are too recent to have their picture on commons . - Bzh-99 (talk) 18:24, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Bzh-99: I was going by what this version of the frwiki article stated in the infobox. The old postcard does look quite similar, so it's possible we can keep the exterior shots. Storkk (talk) 19:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment there is different subject depicted and different issues ;  Keep exteriors : File:Brocéliande EgliseDeTréhorenteuc.JPG and File:Église Sainte-Onenne, Tréhorenteuc, France.jpg (Gillard is not the architect and the changes to the exteriors seems very light), probably keep File:La porte est en dedans - Eglise du Graal.JPG too per COM:TOO. Probably  Delete for File:Tréhorenteuc02.JPG and File:Tréhorenteuc04.JPG as recent works no in PD. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 20:20, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I was acting on incorrect information for the shots of the exterior. As nominator, I've struck the two reasonably clear keeps above: the renovations appear to have stayed true to an older design. I'm less certain about the doorway, but will leave it up to the discretion of the closing admin. Storkk (talk) 21:22, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I'm going to keep the exteriors view as the restoration did not change the architecture, and to delete the painting made by Jean Delpech (d.1988), the statue (date and author unknown), and also the door.
explanation for the door and inscription : [6] in France the law considers a pretty original thing to be protected when there is "the imprint of the author's personality". this photographer was sentenced for counterfeiting because she included this inscription in one of her photo (this is not this photo) and the text was not the main subject of the photo!!, (for other views of the place see also). In our case I think the imprint of the author is visible in the inscription and in the way it is framed around the door. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:37, 29 February 2016 (UTC) oh I was thinking to have found something :) but it's exactly the same thing written in our policies with exactly the same exemple :) Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:19, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: deleted all and kept the both exterior general view, see my last comment above. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:22, 3 March 2016 (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.

Copyright violation -- Tomasina (talk) 10:10, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 03:03, 4 March 2016 (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.

Copyright violation -- Tomasina (talk) 10:11, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Érico (talk) 03:03, 4 March 2016 (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.

Copyright violation -- Tomasina (talk) 10:10, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Érico: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing

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.

Copyright violation -- Tomasina (talk) 10:11, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Érico: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing

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.

Image of book cover, probably non-free WindEwriX (talk) 11:41, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Érico: Copyright violation, see Commons:Licensing

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.

No indication of user's own work on this architectural plan. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


No copyright on a map of a building 300 years old! Your an ayatollah...Jbureau

C'est toi qui a fait ce plan, ou tu l'as trouvé quelque part ? Cedalyon (talk) 02:16, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: The uploader is not the author. --Otourly (talk) 18:24, 4 March 2016 (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.

Ich möchte als Eigentümer nicht, dass mein Haus im Internet ist 79.207.98.214 16:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Darauf gibt es bei solchen Bildern kein Anrecht. --Magnus (talk) 16:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep 1. Panoramafreiheit. 2. Laut Amtsblatt Teil eines Denkmalbereichs und somit für Wikipedia relevant. --Tilman2007 (talk) 16:19, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Per deletion request. →Nagy 13:05, 5 March 2016 (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.

See COM:DW. Stefan2 (talk) 13:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:MOH William G. Harrell.JPG. -- とある白い猫 ちぃ? 14:58, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

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.

I, the creator, want this image deleted....now a commercial use only illustration AuntSpray (talk) 16:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: licenses are not recoverable. --JuTa 21:17, 5 March 2016 (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.

what the hell is that ??? 2A01:E35:2F3C:4550:FD1E:4C10:5DF6:4FBA 15:09, 12 February 2016 (UTC) It is an example of a calendar for discerning adults NSFW type.Seemoramee (talk) 00:36, 13 February 2016 (UTC)SeemorameeSeemoramee (talk) 00:36, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: At Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Seemoramee. --Reventtalk 23:46, 5 March 2016 (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 Seemoramee (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope

— Racconish ☎ 17:20, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If these do not meet with your requirements then do as you see fit and is proper. Some of them are surely in scope of the project and have an educational value, but if you believe otherwise, I leave it up to the community to decide what goes and what can stay. Thank you for your consideration and guidance.Seemoramee (talk)SeemorameeSeemoramee (talk) 00:24, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Delete, en masse, on COM:PRP grounds. The variety of cameras, and depicted people (as well as the presence of images that were clearly from other sources) makes it highly unlikely that these can be reasonably identified as acceptably licensed works. The uploader has, on their talk page, confirmed that some of these are copies of works they 'physically own'. It would not be plausibly possible, IMO, to clean this of copyrighted files, since such images are unlikely to be searchable. --Reventtalk 23:43, 5 March 2016 (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 Seemoramee (talk · contribs)

[edit]

The rationales for the proposed/requested deletion of this selection of files among Special:Contributions/Seemoramee are:

  • privacy concerns: shots in obvious private places without any clear evidence by the photograüh alone that the subject was aware of being imaged (like doing purposeful posing)
  • quality issues: overly photoshopped, badly framed or repetitive scenes, this sums up in my opinion of a lack of educational usefulness.

To rebut any possible accusations of censorship: this selection is only a part of the actual contributions of the uploader. Every image which was e.g. a usable body study was left "unharmed".

Grand-Duc (talk) 20:59, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:31, 27 July 2016 (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 Seemoramee (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Very disgusting images of old nude women uploaded by sockpuppet. Out of scope

/St1995 00:15, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:04, 12 May 2017 (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.

original uploader's request Ecummenic (talk) 23:16, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: after 7 years?. --JuTa 01:29, 6 March 2016 (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 Bindella1 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope

— Racconish ☎ 09:43, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by Krd. --Riley Huntley (talk) 09:14, 2 March 2016 (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 Bindella1 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope

— Racconish ☎ 11:28, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 13:24, 8 February 2016 (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.
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 Bindella1 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope and recreation of previously deleted files. See Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Bindella1

— Racconish ☎ 18:05, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Bindella1 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope and some recreation of previously deleted files.

— Racconish ☎ 21:54, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 12:55, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --A.Savin 12:55, 7 March 2016 (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.

Source states "Photo courtesy Medal of Honor Society." Not necessarily created by the US army. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Works of the Medal of Honor Society does not seem to be in the PD. Its website has a copyright notice. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:32, 9 March 2016 (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.

Spam (w:Special:Undelete/User:RISYS NETWORKS). MER-C 07:37, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope (advertising). --BrightRaven (talk) 08:37, 9 March 2016 (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.

Private image/Photographs of identifiable people 최광모 (talk) 07:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope (private image). --BrightRaven (talk) 08:38, 9 March 2016 (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.

Private image/Photographs of identifiable people 최광모 (talk) 07:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope (private image). --BrightRaven (talk) 08:38, 9 March 2016 (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.

Private image/Photographs of identifiable people 최광모 (talk) 07:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope (private image). --BrightRaven (talk) 08:39, 9 March 2016 (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.

Private image/Photographs of identifiable people 최광모 (talk) 07:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope (private image). --BrightRaven (talk) 08:39, 9 March 2016 (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.

Private image/Photographs of identifiable people 최광모 (talk) 07:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope (private image). --BrightRaven (talk) 08:39, 9 March 2016 (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.

Private image/Photographs of identifiable people 최광모 (talk) 07:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope (private image). --BrightRaven (talk) 08:39, 9 March 2016 (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.

Private image/Photographs of identifiable people 최광모 (talk) 07:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope (private image). --BrightRaven (talk) 08:40, 9 March 2016 (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.

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 07:48, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope (private image). --BrightRaven (talk) 08:40, 9 March 2016 (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.

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Nuno s Pinto / logs (3 uploads on 09.11.2015 = 2x grabbed from Internet/social media). May be additionally out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 07:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:41, 9 March 2016 (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.

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Jtaylor25 / logs = 3x uploads on 10.11.2015 = 2x copyvio. Most likely grabbed somewhere from https://www.blackburnnews.com (Copyright © 2014 Blackburn Radio Inc), considering https://blackburnnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/PtEdward-Casino-Small.jpg (per file path: 05.2013, identical exif) Gunnex (talk) 08:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:42, 9 March 2016 (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.

Werke von Mitoraj dürfen nicht ohne weiteres veröffentlicht werden (Urheberschutz) Dguendel 09:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

 Delete, Igor Mitoraj died 2014, no permission for shown artwork.--Wdwd (talk) 16:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Info: Might affect File:Igor Mitoraj St Jean le Baptiste.JPG as well. →Nagy 12:53, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: No FOP in Italy. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:44, 9 March 2016 (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.

There is no freedom of panorama in Morocco and the building is modern. Taivo (talk) 09:47, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:46, 9 March 2016 (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.

Out of scope (Commons is not your personal free web host). Sismarinho (talk) 09:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Private image only in use on the user page of a contributor without useful contribution for the project. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:48, 9 March 2016 (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 ChrisDixon375 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of project scope. Used in deleted page on en-wp which was either an attack page or an NN teenage autobio.

JohnCD (talk) 10:09, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:51, 9 March 2016 (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.

De minimis does not allow the photograph in the background because of the high image resolution. My suggestion: deleted the older versions and crop the recent file in order to keep the photo of the artillery shell 217.95.126.131 11:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

the doorway is an important part of the photograph : it illustrates the size of the shell. To just crop out the shell itself destroys the whole purpose of this photograph : the context. Anyway, all WWII German official military photographs are now generally treated as public domain. Hard to see who would/could claim copyright violation.49.182.130.54 12:46, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete or crop. Your stance violates COM:PCP; the copyright status must be verified. We cannot just assume. ViperSnake151 (talk) 16:01, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Cropped so that the copyrightable material is de minimis. The former version of the file could be restored if the author of the photograph is identified. --BrightRaven (talk) 09:06, 9 March 2016 (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.

unused personal photos, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 09:09, 9 March 2016 (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.

unused personal photos, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 09:10, 9 March 2016 (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.

out of scope, del. on DE Nolispanmo 12:27, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of scope (advertising). --BrightRaven (talk) 09:10, 9 March 2016 (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.

out of scope, del on DE Nolispanmo 14:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of scope (advertising). --BrightRaven (talk) 08:52, 9 March 2016 (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.

COM:PACKAGING Pepsi, seven up and fruit drink bottles. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:00, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tend to  Keep this. The depicted logos appear to be below COM:TOO. →Nagy 13:23, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Logos below COM:TOO. See COM:PACKAGING. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:55, 9 March 2016 (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.

Out of scope and almost certainly multiple copyvios on the source images. Ubcule (talk) 19:13, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvios. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:58, 9 March 2016 (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.

Self-declared fake, thus no obvious in-scope educational purpose. Ubcule (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:59, 9 March 2016 (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.

Commons isn't Flickr. Out of Scope. Sismarinho (talk) 22:10, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Indeedous (talk) 14:43, 11 February 2016 (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.

Commons is not a private web host. Sismarinho (talk) 19:30, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 09:14, 9 March 2016 (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.

unused personal file, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 19:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 09:14, 9 March 2016 (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.

Doesn't look much like "Thierry Henry" to me! Looks more like an unused personal image. Ubcule (talk) 20:27, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 09:15, 9 March 2016 (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.

Not in use anywhere, outside of project scope, no educational uses. Liance (talk) 21:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete: Minecraft. Gunnex (talk) 13:20, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Copyvio. --BrightRaven (talk) 09:16, 9 March 2016 (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.

Logo of an obscure "minecraft server", not in use anywhere, outside of project scope. Liance (talk) 21:46, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 09:16, 9 March 2016 (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.

Unused user logo, or something. Seems to be out of scope. Stefan2 (talk) 13:45, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 09:38, 9 March 2016 (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.

out of scope, unused private photo 5.60.204.84 12:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 12:44, 9 March 2016 (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.

Model Darrell McClover.jpg DMcClover58 (talk) 13:22, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Picture in use. 2013 upload. --BrightRaven (talk) 12:46, 9 March 2016 (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.

No evidence that this is the uploader's work Nunabas (talk) 13:29, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete: tineye finds several copies on the internet but its copyright status is unclear. The uploader is most unlikely not the copyright holder and prior to uploading it here they uploaded it to the enwiki and asked how the deal with it at en:WP:MCQ#Shirley Walker image. I asked them to provide true and accurate details but as yet they have not done so. Ww2censor (talk) 17:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. probably not own work. --BrightRaven (talk) 12:47, 9 March 2016 (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.

advertising, out of scope, unused. Atlasowa (talk) 14:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 12:48, 9 March 2016 (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.

Likely copyright violation. Previously published as Grossman's Google+ profile picture here. No indication that the uploader is the copyright holder. Huon (talk) 14:39, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 12:48, 9 March 2016 (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.

Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 12:49, 9 March 2016 (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.

Commons is not your private web host. Sismarinho (talk) 15:27, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of scope (private image). --BrightRaven (talk) 12:51, 9 March 2016 (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.

I, the creator, want this image deleted....now used for commercial use AuntSpray (talk) 16:48, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Licence are irrevocable. --BrightRaven (talk) 12:54, 9 March 2016 (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.

I, the creator want this image deleted.....now for commercial use AuntSpray (talk) 16:48, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. The licences are irrevocable. --BrightRaven (talk) 12:55, 9 March 2016 (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.

I, the creator, want this image deleted.....now is commercial use AuntSpray (talk) 16:49, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. The licences are irrevocable. --BrightRaven (talk) 12:57, 9 March 2016 (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.

This is a scaled down version of File:Bisericanenciulesti.jpg //  Gikü  said  done  Friday, 12 February 2016 16:51 (UTC) 16:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 12:59, 9 March 2016 (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.

This is a scaled down and unneededly stylized version of File:Bisericanenciulesti.jpg //  Gikü  said  done  Friday, 12 February 2016 16:52 (UTC) 16:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 13:00, 9 March 2016 (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.

No indication of user's own work on this halftoned black and white portrait. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Probably not own work. --BrightRaven (talk) 13:01, 9 March 2016 (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.

Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 13:22, 9 March 2016 (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.

look to me fairly out of scope. JuTa 16:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And these four files too:

  • File:Feer.jpg
  • File:Angie & Ana.jpg
  • File:Esbe.jpg
  • File:Karla & Angy.jpg
     Delete Some selfies with no educational purpose...--ProfessorX (talk) 20:07, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 14:22, 9 March 2016 (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.

    The image is misleadingly coloured and too small a resolution to be realistically useful. The misleading colouring is of sufficient concern for it to be out of scope as it cannot be used for an educational purpose and any user should use one of the more accurate images in the main category. (talk) 23:30, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. Out of scope: no educational purpose. --BrightRaven (talk) 14:20, 9 March 2016 (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.

    WP article deleted, no appropriate license Mehlauge (talk) 06:18, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Claims taken from a newspaper- as halftone pattern would make obvious anyway- but the claim of "own work" (eigenes werk) is very unlikely unless uploader can show that he/she *did* take the photograph *and* that they have the rights to it.
    Google German translation: (Der Uploader behauptet, dass Bild von einem Zeitungs- als Halbton-Muster genommen wurde offensichtlich anyway- machen würde, aber der Anspruch von "Arbeit" (Eigenes werk) ist sehr unwahrscheinlich, es sei denn, Uploader nachweisen kann, dass er / sie * haben * das Foto nehmen * und * dass sie die Rechte an ihm haben.) Ubcule (talk) 17:31, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Deleted: Verification from the newspaper or original photographer would need to be sent to COM:OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 16:00, 9 March 2016 (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.

    This file is not in the public domain because Yukihiko Yasuda who is the author of this picture died in 1978. see Yukihiko Yasuda Y.haruo (talk) 16:37, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 16:07, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Vandalism. Stang 16:48, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: Unused image of pure text file. Out of scope. --Storkk (talk) 16:08, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Recent building; no FOP in Romania //  Gikü  said  done  Friday, 12 February 2016 16:49 (UTC) 16:49, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 16:09, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Recent building; no FOP in Romania //  Gikü  said  done  Friday, 12 February 2016 16:50 (UTC) 16:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 16:09, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Recent building; no FOP in Romania //  Gikü  said  done  Friday, 12 February 2016 16:50 (UTC) 16:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 16:09, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Out of scope material. Glorious 93 (talk) 17:14, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    What do you mean?--Lukaslt13 (talk) 14:24, 20 February 2016 (UTC)Lukaslt13[reply]
    I think it's OK, I added {{User page image}}. --ghouston (talk) 05:30, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Kept: In use on species:User:Lukaslt13. --Storkk (talk) 16:13, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Userpage image of a non-user. NOTHOST. E4024 (talk) 08:40, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Jianhui67 TC 16:42, 13 October 2017 (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.

    Wrong date, source, and author. Dupicate of deleted File:Guillermo Cervantes.jpg, so this one needs to be deleted for the same reasons. P 1 9 9   17:29, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination and Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Guillermo_Cervantes.jpg. --Storkk (talk) 16:14, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Bad quality. 89.69.34.10 21:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: Letterboxed, appears to be a video still. If uploader is the copyright holder, that should be confirmed via COM:OTRS. --Storkk (talk) 16:29, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Advertising material Mark Marathon (talk) 21:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination... unused and unlikely to be useful for an educational purpose: out of scope. --Storkk (talk) 16:30, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Advertising material Mark Marathon (talk) 21:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination... unused and unlikely to be useful for an educational purpose: out of scope. --Storkk (talk) 16:30, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Completely outside of project scope, not in use anywhere Liance (talk) 21:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination... unused and unlikely to be useful for an educational purpose: out of scope. --Storkk (talk) 16:31, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Advertising Mark Marathon (talk) 21:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination... unused and unlikely to be useful for an educational purpose: out of scope. --Storkk (talk) 16:31, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Completely outside of project scope, not in use anywhere. Liance (talk) 21:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Don't remember why it was uploaded, should probably just be deleted (I'm like, 3 lazy to log in) 98.184.169.143 22:49, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination... unused and unlikely to be useful for an educational purpose: out of scope. --Storkk (talk) 16:32, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Much of the photo is a video screen presumably displaying copyrighted content ViperSnake151 (talk) 04:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    What is displayed is below TOO in the US, maybe also in the Netherlands. BrightRaven (talk) 08:34, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Kept: as per User:BrightRaven. P 1 9 9   17:35, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Following a correctness check, the image is probably wrong (I am the author and the uploader!). Rocchini (talk) 08:34, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination, courtesy deletion. P 1 9 9   17:39, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Lacking adequate source details; said to be "Cross-wiki upload from en.wikipedia.org", but no history of it having been uploaded there first. Also lacking expected EXIF data, making source suspicious. MPF (talk) 10:02, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   17:40, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Smaller size copy of File:2007.04.30 h. 23.30 FOTO (1).JPG. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:05, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   17:53, 9 March 2016 (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.

    There is no academic source for this flag, which the uploader says it's the flag of Nenciulești,_Teleorman. It's rather a retouched version of Romania's flag: File:Flag of Romania.svg. //  Gikü  said  done  Friday, 12 February 2016 16:47 (UTC) 16:47, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   17:52, 9 March 2016 (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.

    This is a scaled down and unneededly stylized version of File:Bisericanenciulesti.jpg //  Gikü  said  done  Friday, 12 February 2016 16:52 (UTC) 16:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   17:52, 9 March 2016 (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.

    This image is the same as another image held by Commons except that words have been overprinted on it. We don't need two the same, and the words (creating some kind of logo or greeting card) are out of COM:SCOPE. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    big deleting session? where do you find a logo? i can't see any. delete all if you don't need it. i understand. this image is categorized as Graphic, that's what it is (my own work from my own photograph, categorized as photograph)--Verena Engel (talk) 18:33, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination, and intended as a promotional image. P 1 9 9   18:08, 9 March 2016 (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 of User:Vividel70

    [edit]

    Commons is not a private web host. --Sismarinho (talk) 17:05, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:09, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Image of front of shop, containing DW of artwork. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:13, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination, otherwise no educational value. P 1 9 9   18:10, 9 March 2016 (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.

    violation de coypright Olivier Tanguy (talk) 18:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:11, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Spam. Used on a spam COI user page on English Wikipedia which I deleted. Unused and not educational - out of scope. BethNaught (talk) 19:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:12, 9 March 2016 (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.

    DR started to verify claimed 'own work' as p.e. imho rather advertisements (see uploader/topic), and media not in use within Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 19:40, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:12, 9 March 2016 (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 Rpryor03 (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    Apparent election maps that have no key or background and thus of very questionable usefulness. Given that the data shown here is probably available elsewhere, it's not worth our while trying to figure out what the images are *supposed* to represent- the easy part- nor the veracity of the content (*especially* given that some of them explicitly claim that "this is fake"(!))

    Ubcule (talk) 19:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:19, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Out of scope for Commons. (A Google translation of the description looks strange to me also, and looks like nonsense...?) Ubcule (talk) 20:36, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Auto-translation into Spanish: "Fuera del alcance de los Commons. (Traducción Google de la descripción parece extraño para mí también, y parece absurdo ...?)" Ubcule (talk) 20:37, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:21, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Self-promotional content, only (former) use was on [spam userpage at es.wikipedia for non-contributing user]. Ubcule (talk) 20:42, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:22, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Appears to be derivative or copy of watermarked (and presumed copyrighted) content from another source not obviously related to uploader's own website "paper-bird.net". Ubcule (talk) 21:08, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: copyvio. P 1 9 9   18:32, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Completely outside of project scope, not in use anywhere. Liance (talk) 21:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:33, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Non-notable individual. Outside project scope. Mark Marathon (talk) 21:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:33, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Completely outside of project scope, not in use anywhere. Also potential copyvio Liance (talk) 21:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:34, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Completely outside of project scope, not in use anywhere. Also potential copyvio Liance (talk) 21:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:34, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Completely outside of project scope, not in use anywhere. Liance (talk) 21:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:34, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Advertising Mark Marathon (talk) 21:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:34, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Completely outside of project scope, not in use anywhere. Liance (talk) 21:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:35, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Icon of a "group", not in use, outside of project scope. Liance (talk) 21:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:35, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Outside of project scope, not in use anywhere. Also potential copyvio. Liance (talk) 22:01, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:36, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Potential copyvio of "roblox". Liance (talk) 22:02, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:36, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Out of scope promo spam. Ubcule (talk) 22:29, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:37, 9 March 2016 (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 Duelove (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    Out of scope promo spam.

    Ubcule (talk) 22:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   18:37, 9 March 2016 (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.

    Unfortunately, there is no Freedom of Panorama in France. Stained glass window likely created in 1943, and is probably not yet {{PD-France}}. Storkk (talk) 12:24, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. The artist seems to be Henri (or Henry) Uzureau. I could not find his death year. --BrightRaven (talk) 09:41, 10 March 2016 (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 Ekosmunidad (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    My Spanish is very limited, but there appears to be nothing here to indicate that these idea(s)/plan(s) for "experimental solar prototype design to condense water in remote areas where the sun is abundant and scarce water" aren't the uploader's own original research. While Commons isn't identical to Wikipedia in its approach to everything, I still wonder whether this is within Commons' educational scope.

    (Google translation; "Mi español es muy limitado, pero no parece haber nada aquí para indicar que éstos idea (s) / Plan (s) para "diseño experimental prototipo solar para condensar el agua en áreas remotas donde el sol es abundante agua y escaso" no son propia investigación original del cargador. Mientras Commons no es idéntica a la Wikipedia en su enfoque de todo, todavía me pregunto si esto es dentro del ámbito educativo Comunes.")

    Ubcule (talk) 20:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Keep This seems a child's rendition of a standard solar still. Its hardly Original Research because it is based on sound scientific principles and the laws of physics. Very educational and completely in scope.122.180.234.13 02:57, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: Out of scope. Unused, very low-quality diagrams mentioning a non-notable concept/organization (Ekosophia). --BrightRaven (talk) 09:47, 10 March 2016 (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.

    Copyrighted image from http://www.voteforfraser.com/meet-bill.html NeemNarduni2 (talk) 05:47, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    •  Weak keep: This image appears to be uploaded by Bill Fraser's own campaign, based on the username User:Vote4fraser and the activity on en:User talk:Vote4fraser. It's not particularly difficult for a campaign staff member to take a photo these days; the website designer, photographer, and Commons uploader could all be the same person. It would make things easier if the uploader was more explicit than {{Own}}, but the wiki beginner upload tool encourages that with its choices. Also, based on the date in the information, it appears that the uploader knew when the photo was taken, since it has an earlier date than the upload. (However, the EXIF data has been stripped from the file.) --Closeapple (talk) 16:23, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Deleted: Copyvio - http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20151014/news/151019326/ - way earlier date. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:34, 12 March 2016 (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.

    Copyright violation -- Tomasina (talk) 10:10, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:37, 12 March 2016 (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.

    Copyright violation -- Tomasina (talk) 10:14, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:38, 12 March 2016 (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.

    Подложная лицензия: http://hotlib.mogilev.by/broshura.html -- Tomasina (talk) 10:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:38, 12 March 2016 (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.

    Kept: (1) - http://vedda.org/obeyesekere2.htm, author dies 1940. (2) - http://www.vmsl-library.com/index.php/cartoons/37-photos-of-old-ceylon-1890?limitstart=0, image taken in 1890. --Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:52, 12 March 2016 (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.

    They are not own work by the uploader. The images are found on many sites. The photo of Nicholas II is a copyrighted derivative work (the original photo is black and white).

    Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 05:49, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Delete per nom. Unfitlouie (talk) 04:58, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:17, 16 March 2016 (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.

    moderate quality, no appropriate license Mehlauge (talk) 07:37, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Delete no educational value + unused. Unfitlouie (talk) 05:00, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:17, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Has been repleaced by File:Nolan-chart-zh.svg. Stang 10:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:18, 16 March 2016 (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.

    request from the uploader. mistake, the file does not correspond to the title iopensa (talk) 11:05, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Can a rename justify a keep ? Unfitlouie (talk) 05:03, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:18, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:18, 16 March 2016 (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 Puffy20050803 (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    Puffy20050803 is obviously sockpuppet of Brianz20050803, copyvio recidivist. See also: User talk:Brianz20050803 and Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Brianz20050803. --UCinternational (talk) 13:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:18, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Personal photo of non-notable person. Out of scope. Kindzmarauli (talk) 14:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Kept: Still used at Wikidata plus this person is not entirely not notble. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:19, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Personal photo of non-notable person. Out of scope. Kindzmarauli (talk) 14:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: Not out of scope but it is a copyright violation. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:20, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Image taken from http://dufc.co/the-teams/first-team/ - the player no longer with the club so the image doesn't appear at the source, but this is a team photo Ytoyoda (talk) 15:13, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: Uploader's name matches the name of the subject and this is clearly not a selfie. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:24, 16 March 2016 (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.

    NIKLASADAM 109.182.158.202 15:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Kept: Hatsjoe. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:22, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Permission to use the photo comes from Dr. Kenneth Hansraj, who is depicted himself and this is not a selfie. Not he, but the photographer must give OTRS-permission. Taivo (talk) 15:16, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:23, 16 March 2016 (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 Aat (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    Small images without EXIF. Some are clearly screenshots from TV (like File:EdouardDelruelle.jpg). I think probably none of them is own work.

    BrightRaven (talk) 15:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:22, 16 March 2016 (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 Miguel a secas (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text documents. Should be in SVG or moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.

    EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:34, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Why is this out of scope? Don't we host various alphabets? Fry1989 eh? 18:05, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Kept: I tend to agree with Fry. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:26, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused Wikipedia screenshot. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:35, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:26, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Language is integrated in to Galaxies-AGN-Inner-Structure.svg and this file is not necessary any more. --Calle Cool (talk) 11:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:26, 16 March 2016 (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.

    It's work of international organization, not USA government. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:46, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Delete Good catch. WHO works are incompatible with Commons licencing / hosting policy. [7] Unfitlouie (talk) 05:14, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:26, 16 March 2016 (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.

    If the description is correct and this image dates to the 1880s, it doesn't seem possible to be "own work" of the uploader, and more information is needed. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:47, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: 1880is old enough to assume that the work is PD but this work is likely not that old. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:28, 16 March 2016 (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 Akhtar muslimi (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    Book, book covers and historical photo. No evidence of permission(s).

    EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:29, 16 March 2016 (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 Akhtar muslimi (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    Highly unlikely to be own work of the uploader

    Migebert (talk) 06:19, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Jon Kolbert (talk) 15:05, 23 September 2018 (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.

    While this file was uploaded from flickr and reviewed, it consists of COM:PACKAGING. It is not in use. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:29, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Pepsi, Sunkist & 7up in Thai as well as the Lactasoy advert in the foreground are all COM:COPYVIOs. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:29, 16 March 2016 (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.

    No indication of user's own work on this handdrawn banner. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:03, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:30, 16 March 2016 (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.

    In order for the stated license to be correct, a source and date of the image is required, also author wherever possible. This image is in use in en:wiki, but without source or author unfortunately must be nominated. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:44, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    I've added date and source; author unknown. It may well have been published in Caproni's book, published in the 1930s but I don't have a copy.TSRL (talk) 17:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Deleted: For now this fails com:EVIDENCE. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:30, 16 March 2016 (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.

    This image bears no resemblance to the one in the description line which might be assumed to be a source, but unfortunately is a totally different image. This image is not in use. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:47, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:30, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Small size, no metadata, no indication of user's own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    THIS IS MY OWN WORK. Evidence with another photograph of this series: https://www.facebook.com/ENGEL.Grafik.Web.Design/photos/pb.697281903625658.-2207520000.1455647279./1098261883527656/?type=3&theater but delete it if you feel like deleting, valentine is over anyway --Verena Engel (talk) 18:29, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    @ENGEL Grafik Web Design: please follow the instructions on COM:OTRS to confirm your authorship and license. Thank you. Storkk (talk) 16:11, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Deleted: OTRS wil restore it in due course. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:31, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Derivative works of the logos depicted. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:02, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Part of a sculpture - {{FoP-Israel}}. -- Geagea (talk) 11:28, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Not a sculpture. Seems to be an entrance gate / arch of some kind. Unfitlouie (talk) 05:19, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Kept: Might be borderline but since Israel has a broad FOP provision I do believe this is covered. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:33, 16 March 2016 (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.

    This file was initially tagged by 122.162.81.34 as Copyvio (Copyright) Amitie 10g (talk) 19:03, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    •  Keep The only copyrightable in a music sheet is the music work represented rather than the sheet itself. Already in the public domain. --Amitie 10g (talk) 16:28, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete. Or needs vastly better licencing templates considering the usage and status of this file and composer controversies. Per contra, since the source of the image is not given it should be straightway deleted. Thus there is no clarity if this image is an authentic version of a score actually authored by Rabindranath Tagore. Whereas the text (words) of the song may arguably be in public domain after 2002, there is no such clarity on the authorship of the version of the musical score this image purports to depict. This score seems to be that of the marching version (supposedly) composed by Captain Ram Singh of the INA. Ram Singh was alive in 1997. The present US PD template given for this image is clearly inapplicable because it presumes that Rabindranath Tagore is the author of this music score, Tagore died after 1 Jan 1941 - he died on 7 Aug 1941. Also on the URAA date (1996) the Jana Gana Mana was still in copyright in its country of publication - India.(Death + 60 years). The copyright status in Indian law distinguishes literary works and musical works, so the 1911 base date used by uploader is also inapplicable.182.64.243.113 02:20, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    COMMENT : How is this composition (National Anthem of India) being circulated by Wikipedia Commons on a Creative Commons Share Alike licence which allows mutilation and mashups ? The Supreme Court of India has ruled [8] the National Anthem of India is not open to mutilation. The song is a literary creation which cannot be changed ? Music of the Bengali version of Jana Gana Mana was set in raag Shankarabharana, this score is not that version.

     DeleteThe origin of this music sheet and its actual author / arranger will determine its copyright status. The copyright of a musical arrangement is independent from the original's. In 1951 the Indian Government held an international competition to freeze the official music arrangement of the national anthem, the prize-winning arrangement is the perpetual property of the Indian state. 112.52.121.057 10:39, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Delete per COM:EVID burden of evidence is on the uploader or other person arguing for the file to be retained. COM:EVID additionally requires at least that the source of the file be specified, along with the original source (where the file is a derivative work) Unfitlouie (talk) 05:25, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:33, 16 March 2016 (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 Francisco Seixas (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    Unclear copyright status. Photos and/or drawings of foreign (not US works) coats of arms/seals and other symbols, uploaded since 01.2016, taken from external sites and licensed with {{PD-EdictGov}} + randomly {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} or {{PD-old}} or all of them, like File:Guarda Fiscal.jpg. So far I understand {{PD-EdictGov}} it seems to be text-based including edicts of a government, local or foreign, like "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials."

    We have photos & drawings of official symbols from (the)

    mostly (if not all) related to gendarmerie (a military force charged with police duties), used to illustrating the ptwiki entry pt:Gendarmaria

    They may be in public domain by other reasons but relevant info must be provided.

    Gunnex (talk) 19:24, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:35, 16 March 2016 (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 in Category:Belo Oriente regarding official symbols

    [edit]

    Coat of arms (brasão) and flag (bandeira) of Brazilian municipality pt:Belo Oriente, created — per pt:Brasão de Belo Oriente and http://www.belooriente.mg.gov.br/mat_vis.aspx?cd=6514 — by municipal law nº 461, 27/12/1995 only in 1995, failing {{PD-BrazilGov}} = "(...) published or commissioned (...) prior to 1983." No trivial text/shape logo, failing {{PD-textlogo}}/{{PD-shape}}. All coats of arms and flags of Brazilian municipalities are established by municipal law. Generally for most of the Brazilian coats of arms and flags: unlikely also that these symbols were digitized in there present form prior to 1983 (when "Internet" was available only for a few institutions, TCP/IP was standardized in 1982). Their creation date could be quite recent, maybe not even by an employee of the Brazilian government (mostly some years after official federal constitution, see also this extreme case, where a Brazilian municipality created his official symbols in 2014: 81 years after emancipation...).

    Gunnex (talk) 20:04, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:35, 16 March 2016 (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.

    OTRS has received a request from a member of the Synagogue requesting to have the image taken down, the reason being that the image is of minors in a private place with no consent obtained from the people shown or their legal guardians. Per Commons:Deletion_policy#Photographs_of_identifiable_people, I'm nominating the file for deletion. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 20:16, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Can a synagogue be classified as a private place ? Also, all the subjects are aware they are being photographed and are mostly smiling. Having said that, the burden is on the uploader to provide evidence to keep it. Unfitlouie (talk) 15:53, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Delete Not educationally useful along with the privacy and religious considerations of minors and the UN declaration of rights of the child (Art. 14). Unfitlouie (talk) 04:57, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: Fair request. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:36, 16 March 2016 (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.

    The file seems to me out of scope due to bad composition. We have actually quite a lot of images about Tanzania. This is not usable as city view, it does not illustrate the people. At first I thought, that it can be used at least for illustrating the bus company, but the company is not mentioned in en.wiki. The uploader is banned. Taivo (talk) 20:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:39, 16 March 2016 (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 in Category:Bom Jardim de Minas regarding official symbols

    [edit]

    Coat of arms (brasão) and flag (bandeira) of Brazilian municipality pt:Bom Jardim de Minas, created — per pt:Brasão de Bom Jardim de Minas and (example) File:Brasão de Bom Jardim de Minas.png — only in 1988, failing {{PD-BrazilGov}} = "(...) published or commissioned (...) prior to 1983." PD-self "own" works like File:Logobj.jpg + File:Bandeira Bom Jardim Minas.jpg obviously grabbed from Internet. No trivial text/shape logo, failing {{PD-textlogo}}/{{PD-shape}}. All coats of arms and flags of Brazilian municipalities are established by municipal law. Generally for most of the Brazilian coats of arms and flags: unlikely also that these symbols were digitized in there present form prior to 1983 (when "Internet" was available only for a few institutions, TCP/IP was standardized in 1982). Their creation date could be quite recent, maybe not even by an employee of the Brazilian government (mostly some years after official federal constitution, see also this extreme case, where a Brazilian municipality created his official symbols in 2014: 81 years after emancipation...).

    Gunnex (talk) 20:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:39, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Higher resolution found here predating Commons upload by this user by a couple of years. Upload here is also low resolution (another warning flag).

    Claimed "own work", but all user's uploads seem to have that on them, even those that were indicated as derived from uploads by other Commons users.

    Ubcule (talk) 22:09, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Delete per nom Unfitlouie (talk) 05:28, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:37, 16 March 2016 (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 Volanick2 (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    Small size, no EXIF, most probably not own work.

    Yann (talk) 10:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: INeverCry 18:57, 3 March 2014 (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 Volanick2 (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    High wiki use. Unclear copyright status, both files uploaded by Volanick2 (talk · contributions · Statistics) with an extensive, questionable upload behaviour. File:Arenadabaixada2.jpg (high res 4320x3240px, exif available, uploaded on 04.06.2014, showing the Brazilian stadium en:Arena da Baixada, used for FIFA World Cup 2014) is sourced with a direct link to a Russian photo hoster, given copyright credits to "Gustavo Paolo". Licensed with {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} --> on which base?. http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9651/185808115.20/0_e68d8_4635a199_XXL.jpg (last modified: 02.06.2014) itself is a low res 1024x768px image without exif infos and can't be the source. The same file - now identical as available at fotki - was uploaded 1 day earlier = File:0 e68d8 4635a199 XXL.jpg, given also the copyright credits to "Gustavo Paolo", here licensed contradictionary as "own work" via self-{{Cc-zero}}. Note that the uploader Volanick2 is known as "(Tiago) Volanick". Even considering that at Fotki the same 1024x768px file contains the exif-infos (= http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9651/185808115.20/0_e68d8_4635a199_orig.jpg, just change "_XXL" to "_orig" for retrieving the original version) it remains unclear from where the uploader got the high res version and the infos about the author and license as {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} (or self-{{Cc-zero}}).

    It might be that the file was taken originally somewhere from http://www.copa2014.gov.br, e.g. http://www.copa2014.gov.br/pt-br/sedes/curitiba (official Brazilian portal of FIFA World Cup 2014, with some content licensed as {{Cc-by-3.0-br}}) but further details are needed to verify the copyright status.

    Gunnex (talk) 12:45, 16 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    File originally posted on skyscrapercity.com by Gustavo Paolo _ I contacted him on Private message there and sent him the link to this page. Hans. 23:44, 17 June 2014 UTC — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.186.210.90 (talk • contribs)

    Gustavo Paolo here! Tiago Volanick contacted me through Skyscrapercity private message, asking for a high resolution version of that picture, I gave him by e-mail the original .rw2 that was generated from my camera that day. I`m not a user of Wikipedia, but I allow complete use of this file, if the WIkipedia community so desires... 17/June, 2014 (21:44)

    (21:46) Gustavo Paolo's email: e.sazhe@ya.ru — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.101.64.41 (talk • contribs)

    Hi! Thanks for you comments. With these I could identify the related fotki-user "e-sazhe". The image is available via http://fotki.yandex.ru/users/e-sazhe/?&p=13 = http://fotki.yandex.ru/next/users/e-sazhe/album/425960/view/944344 = (as indicated by uploader) http://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9651/185808115.20/0_e68d8_4635a199_orig and it was posted on 02.06.2014 by "Gustavo_Paolo" via http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=114529140&postcount=1080.
    @189.101.64.41: (Gustavo Paolo): We need a written permission from you. Please send an email from e.sazhe@ya.ru to COM:OTRS = permissions-commons@wikimedia.org confirming that you are releasing both files under a {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}-license. Preferably, you may use the email-template available at COM:OTRS#Declaration of consent for all enquiries. If everything checks out the files will be tagged by OTRS-team with an "OTRS-ticket" confirming the license infos. In the meantime I tagged the files with OTRS pending. Gunnex (talk) 07:45, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    OTRS permission for public domain release of the image received and info added into files. I think, the low-res image can be deleted as duplicate. Ankry (talk) 09:12, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Resolved -FASTILY 17:40, 24 June 2014 (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 Volanick2 (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent (Facebook) resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Volanick2 (ex-1-month blocked serial copyright violator [see also the last 2 entries on his talk page], most likely a sock of Volanick1 (talk · contributions · Statistics) with similar deleted images). File:Panoramicatoledo.jpg (aerial image of Brazilian municipality pt:Toledo (Paraná)), uploaded 12.2014, already circualting since 2013 on Facebook via https://www.facebook.com/aeroclique/photos/a.769783296369057.1073741827.769779026369484/818835761463810/?type=3&theater (© by "Aeroclique Foto Aérea", taken from this album full of aerial shots)). File:PanoramicaToledo.jpg is a most likely a reupload, 1stly uploaded by sock Volanick1 with source = Panoramio (and most likely later posted on skyscraper/photobucket).

    Ignoring false claim of authorship/license/etc. of File:Bandeira Toledo PR.jpg (flag of the related municipality), derived from the official coat of arms designed by "Arcinoé Antonio Peixoto de Faria" in 1972, in PD by other means...

    Gunnex (talk) 23:18, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:36, 16 March 2016 (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 Volanick2 (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Volanick2 (serial copyright violator, sock pupperty, Panoramio/Facebook/etc, grabber). File:Toledoparcial.JPG = reupload per above (see exif of http://i58.tinypic.com/mjwahi.jpg). Uploaded on 26.03.2016.

    Gunnex (talk) 07:16, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:16, 31 August 2016 (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.

    There is no freedom of panorama in Albania. Although depicted person died in 1938, the sculpture is probably much younger. Taivo (talk) 10:00, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:36, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Historical photos, NOT published under free license. If we do not know, who is the photographer, then we cannot be sure, that they are in public domain. If the photos are anonymous, then they are in PD, but this needs also evidence. Taivo (talk) 10:06, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:37, 16 March 2016 (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 Santy Menor (talk · contribs)

    [edit]

    Appear to be straight copies of (presumed copyrighted) newspaper articles, with insufficient background given to show that uploader owns the rights to the content in the first place (even if it is about him or someone he knows).

    The user's other uploads (four images to date) appear to be fine, however.

    Ubcule (talk) 20:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Automatic Google translation into Portuguese:- "Parecem ser cópias seguidos de artigos de jornal (com direitos de autor presumido), com fundo insuficiente, dado para mostrar que Uploader detém os direitos sobre o conteúdo em primeiro lugar (mesmo que seja sobre ele ou alguém que ele conhece). outros envios do usuário (quatro imagens até à data) parecem estar bem, no entanto." Ubcule (talk) 20:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:46, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Straightforward technical reproduction of existing logo that's unlikely to be work of uploader (unless he created that original logo itself) who's also not likely to be in a position to license it under the stated terms.

    Bear in mind that this is a UK work, and it also has to fall under the threshold of originality in the UK which is supposedly much lower than that in the US. Of course, if there is evidence that it's been released under a Commons-compatible license, or someone else can demonstrate why this file is free, that's fine- but it wasn't stated in the upload description. Ubcule (talk) 22:03, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:46, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Low resolution duplicate of File:George Payne, Vanity Fair, 1875-09-18.jpg The Traditionalist (talk) 22:09, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Widespread use on the web going back several years, confirm via reverse Google Image search. Ubcule (talk) 22:13, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Low resolution duplicate of File:John Wodehouse, Vanity Fair, 1869-07-17.jpg The Traditionalist (talk) 22:14, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Low resolution duplicate of File:William Hood Walrond, Vanity Fair, 1886-07-17.jpg The Traditionalist (talk) 22:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Low resolution duplicate of File:Herbert John Gladstone, Vanity Fair, 1882-05-06.jpg The Traditionalist (talk) 22:17, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Low resolution duplicate of File:Michael Hicks Beach, Vanity Fair, 1874-08-22.jpg The Traditionalist (talk) 22:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Low resolution duplicate of File:Alfred Lyttelton, Vanity Fair, 1884-09-20.jpg The Traditionalist (talk) 22:20, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Low resolution duplicate of File:Edward Horsman Vanity Fair 10 August 1872.jpg The Traditionalist (talk) 22:21, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Derivative of presumably-copyrighted newspaper article, with insufficient background/evidence to show ownership or evidence of permission.

    Google automated Spanish translation : "Derivado del artículo de prensa con derechos de autor, presumiblemente-, con el fondo insuficiente / evidencia para demostrar la propiedad o la constancia del permiso."

    Ubcule (talk) 22:23, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Low resolution duplicate of File:Robert Montagu, Vanity Fair, 1870-10-01.jpg The Traditionalist (talk) 22:26, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Insufficient evidence given that this is usable under a free license (Automated translation into Polish: Wystarczających dowodów, zważywszy, że jest użyteczny na wolnej licencji) Ubcule (talk) 22:27, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Low resolution duplicate of File:John Eldon Gorst, Vanity Fair, 1880-07-31.jpg The Traditionalist (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Low resolution duplicate of File:Gathorne Gathorne-Hardy, Vanity Fair, 1872-04-20.jpg The Traditionalist (talk) 22:30, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:45, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Low resolution duplicate of File:George Otto Trevelyan, Vanity Fair, 1873-08-02.jpg The Traditionalist (talk) 22:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:46, 16 March 2016 (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.

    Low resolution duplicate of File:George Goschen, Vanity Fair, 1869-06-12.jpg The Traditionalist (talk) 22:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 18:46, 16 March 2016 (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.

    The person in the photo is not Salvatore Maranzano, but Salvatore Messina a London gangster that operated from the 1930's to 1950's. It comes from the August 13, 1967 edition of the London Sunday Times from an article entitled "Messinas and Mayfair: the Links Remain" with the image identified as Salvatore Messina. Apparently it was misidentified as Maranzano in a book from the 1990's. Since the article first appeared in a British newspaper in 1967, the image may still be under copyright. The English Wikipedia article on the Messina brothers states that Salvatore went into hiding to avoid authorities during the 1950's with his fate unknown. That would mean the photo was at least around a decade old when it was published in the Times.

    See this magazine article (paywall) and the English Wikipedia Salvatore Maranzano Talk Page. If the photo can be determined to be in the public domain, then it's title should be changed. Libertybison (talk) 20:23, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    I should also point out that the license the uploader provided is not valid. They just copied the image from a wikia page where it had been copied from elsewhere on the internet. Libertybison (talk) 15:26, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Delete per nom and per COM:EVID. Unfitlouie (talk) 15:34, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:22, 20 March 2016 (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.

    Derivative of (presumed) copyrighted work; if it isn't copyrighted, the explanation for why the *original* is usable under a free license should be given. Ubcule (talk) 20:32, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Auto-translation into Spanish: "Derivado de los trabajos con derechos de autor (presunta); si no tiene derechos de autor, la explicación de por qué el *original* es utilizable bajo una licencia libre debe ser administrada." Ubcule (talk) 20:33, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:21, 20 March 2016 (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.

    Image is wrong as it shows Seattle as FHLB bank, which it is not. 199.83.40.33 21:46, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Kept: in use. --Krd 08:21, 20 March 2016 (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.

    The money of El Salvador has copyright Dossier2 (talk) 02:35, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

     Delete per nom and per COM:EVID. Unfitlouie (talk) 15:36, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


    Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 08:20, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]