Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2021/04/29
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_con_Tony_Piaceri_(al_centro)_con_la_Coppa_per_il_ballo_sardo.jpg){kind=link}
Притяжение_Земли.png){kind=link}
ТЕХНОЛОГИЯ_РАСЩЕПЛЕНИЯ_НУКЛОНОВ.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
{{copyvio}] Nyanardsan (talk) 02:15, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by AntiCompositeNumber at 02:15, 29 April 2021 UTC: Copyright violation, no indication of a free license on the source site (F1): https://klikkalsel.com/bandara-syamsuddin-noor-banjarbaru-pindah-ini-imbauan-senior-manager-pt-angkasa-pura-i-banjarbaru/ --Krdbot 08:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Rechtechaos, bitte entfernen Grizma (talk) 17:14, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Reinhard Kraasch (talk) 17:24, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Not own work because watermarks of bangkokbusclub.com. It also shows the person who took the photo, which doesn't quite match up with the uploader. Bebiezaza (talk) 08:36, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 07:37, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Not own work; clearly screenshoted (maybe from YouTube) Bebiezaza (talk) 12:59, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Update: definitely from YouTube, the specific video and timestamp is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tSNcHjohRk&t=219s at 3:39 --Bebiezaza (talk) 19:08, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 07:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
missing EXIF and image found on https://www.airliners.net/photo/Thai-Airways-International/Airbus-A310-204/162690/L about 20 years before current EXIF date Bebiezaza (talk) 15:16, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 07:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
missing EXIF and image found on https://www.airliners.net/photo/El-Al-Israel-Airlines-Cargo/Boeing-747-124-SF/1453196/L Bebiezaza (talk) 15:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Túrelio (talk) 07:37, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Copyright Playground123 (talk) 03:00, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Speedy delete F1. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:15, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 15:32, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
je voudrais actualiser la photographie Lokirec (talk) 04:12, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep Ce n’est pas une raison suffisante pour qu’un inconnu demande la suppression de cette photo. --Claude Truong-Ngoc (talk) 08:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 15:43, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
I want to ask Savadogoaly33 (talk) 15:04, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
how tol d Savadogoaly33 (talk) 15:05, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
how to delet Savadogoaly33 (talk) 15:05, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim (talk) 15:25, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Copyright violation - there is no information at the source, that this picture is free for use! Mef.ellingen (talk) 21:21, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by DMacks at 06:23, 30 April 2021 UTC: Copyright violation: Copyright violation - there is no information at the source, that this picture is free for use! --Krdbot 14:50, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Mal hoja Dolbm (talk) 01:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim (talk) 18:17, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Used in vanity draft. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:39, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted by Ymblanter at 07:01, 1 Mai 2021 UTC: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing (F1): Copyright violation: https://www.filmelier.com/br/film/6165/luccas-neto-em-uma-baba-muito-esquisita --Krdbot 14:48, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Sakorria does not exist, fantasy diagram, out of project scope Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 12:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: and redirected as duplicate. --JuTa 23:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
useless test file, out of project scope Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 12:15, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 08:47, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
This file was made to represent the composition of the Sacramento City Council. However, I made an error during its generation, which is that the Sacramento City Council has nine total seats, and not ten. I will regenerate the diagram with the correct info, but request that this one be deleted. LocalWonk (talk) 01:55, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:01, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Low-res file in PNG format, unlikely to be the uploader’s work Ytoyoda (talk) 03:00, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:32, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
This photo shows up in a Tineye.com reverse image search as belonging to unsplash.com stock photo collection, taken by Ricky Singh. The image has a 2019 date. https://unsplash.com/photos/rTikKt6ir5g Binksternet (talk) 03:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Derivative work: shows an announcement containing an underlying photograph. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:14, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
File:T173070Interieur, kastenwand in de woonkamer van het voorhuis, tijdens restauratie - Nansum - 20414506 - RCE.jpg
[edit]
No photo, odd file. See File:Interieur, kastenwand in de woonkamer van het voorhuis, tijdens restauratie - Nansum - 20414506 - RCE.jpg for the good file. JopkeB (talk) 04:27, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:32, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private file storage. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 04:52, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:33, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Bad quality photo without educational use Drakosh (talk) 05:24, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:33, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
no proof this is the uploader's work, a reverse image search shows this same photo from multiple different websites:https://www.google.com/search?tbs=sbi:AMhZZivFGaBTDvfuP1CPVj5-3LeCFQHMiDXKBS15PlWd66YWnEfqIUUSRGTzQKlAcaUlwXm45qCCpZDMpeFzXYq_10lmI3Y-1fCac1wD8VvMDbqn8Zq5xoB4Mt9K_1v_1581vUa9iuzP3Vx4RVI3H5gGBlgJMfY6kjRjpK3mLSavv6DNHKUWxcnvXW9DoGdjWl1m6CGR4Lrx3F5oX5Dt_1VFwoVC-jIhEZ1NPk3gJwSc9iBApYGMBpe4M5b-nuz7mYMSYdqoWTGuL1zopHxUuQprFh1vKN9TBQ61NRdDypuhaA_1xLAOkcp5sRzXwCeZl9Ft-k2bQx231ZK3fKz3Zr7woaVhWPVZy5bhvjZTMpdJWOlwphQjLI4ftfsjZsjCwSxbiWWRgR6fY3_1lNo44dLDn_12Mzr3KvFgaZ0MQ 47.223.78.205 05:48, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
no proof this is the uploader's work, a reverse image search shows this same photo from multiple different websites:https://www.google.com/search?tbs=sbi:AMhZZivFGaBTDvfuP1CPVj5-3LeCFQHMiDXKBS15PlWd66YWnEfqIUUSRGTzQKlAcaUlwXm45qCCpZDMpeFzXYq_10lmI3Y-1fCac1wD8VvMDbqn8Zq5xoB4Mt9K_1v_1581vUa9iuzP3Vx4RVI3H5gGBlgJMfY6kjRjpK3mLSavv6DNHKUWxcnvXW9DoGdjWl1m6CGR4Lrx3F5oX5Dt_1VFwoVC-jIhEZ1NPk3gJwSc9iBApYGMBpe4M5b-nuz7mYMSYdqoWTGuL1zopHxUuQprFh1vKN9TBQ61NRdDypuhaA_1xLAOkcp5sRzXwCeZl9Ft-k2bQx231ZK3fKz3Zr7woaVhWPVZy5bhvjZTMpdJWOlwphQjLI4ftfsjZsjCwSxbiWWRgR6fY3_1lNo44dLDn_12Mzr3KvFgaZ0MQ 47.223.78.205 05:49, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
Probably not own work: User:Mgm365 (the uploader) versus "Vernon G Stamm" (claimed source/author). If there was indeed permission from the real author who is the photographer, the uploader must contact that author and that author must submit an email via COM:OTRS process.
- File:Modern Metropolitan Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception -Interior.jpg
- File:La Vista del Mar TreeHouse.jpg
- File:Zamboanga City TreeHouse.jpg
- File:Zamboanga International Seaport Cargo Terminal.jpg
- File:Zamboanga International Airport Terminal.jpg
- File:Zamboanga City RT Lim Boulevard.jpg
- File:Immaculate Conception Cathedral in Zamboanga City.jpg
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Metadata indicates "FBMD" (sourced from Facebook automatically). Verification via COM:OTRS is required, as FB-sourced images may not be really self-taken photos by the uploader. If these are uploader's own photos, either upload original versions or, use COM:OTRS process.
- File:Hock Chuan Avalo Chinese Temple.jpg
- File:Fort Pilar Shrine 2016.jpg
- File:R.T. Lim Boulevard Zamboanga City 2015.jpg
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 18:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP. --Wdwd (talk) 13:42, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
User had a history of problematic uploads. These ones are doubtful if own work: missing or strange (usually non-FB transmission codes) metadata and inconsistent resolutions.
- File:KCC Mall de ZC 1.jpg
- File:Rio de Abong Abong.jpg
- File:La Isla de La Santa Cruz.jpg
- File:BSP Zamboanga Branch.jpg
- File:Zamboanga City Skyline 2016.jpg
- File:Putik Barangay Hall.jpg
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:57, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:33, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Artist died 1988 - needs OTRS from heirs Gbawden (talk) 06:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:34, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of scope, personal artwork Gbawden (talk) 06:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:34, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Unexplained file without clear content, no visible use, description "Just a fake image"
Seems to be offtopic for Commons (Commons:Project scope)
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:04, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
copyright violation you are NOT the photographer Theroadislong (talk) 07:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- I have sent the proper confirmation email and was provided this picture by the owner/photographer. Thank you. SofaBurn Intern (talk)
There is an OTRS email received for “File:SofaBurn Crew.jpg” but not processed yet, ticket:2021042910007437. --Mussklprozz (talk) 18:42, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: it's spam regardless. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:03, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Copyright violations
- File:Origine France Garantie *Afnor.png
- File:Header site Novacel Optical.jpg
- File:Logo Novacel University.png
- File:Novacel university.jpg
- File:Optilenti.jpg
- File:Roger-duning.jpg
- File:Service télédétourage et montage de Novacel.jpg
- File:Vue 3D Ultimate BInOVA.png
- File:Breitfeld-schliekert-logo.jpg
- File:Novacel Instruments.jpg
- File:Division du CA de Novacel.png
- File:Effectif Novacel (2006 - 2020).png
- File:CA Novacel (2006 - 2020).png
- File:Afnor iso14001.jpg
- File:Afnor iso 13485.jpg
- File:Afnor ISO 9001.jpg
- File:Leica eyecare volterra victoire silmo d or 2019.ogv
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
Shev123 (talk) 07:58, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:36, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo. Should be in SVG if useful.
- File:Logo Leica Eyecare blanc et noir.pdf
- File:Afnor - Certification mesures sanitaires COVID 19.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:50, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:04, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Taken from FB per MD, not own work, needs OTRS Gbawden (talk) 08:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:36, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
This file already exists on English Wikipedia and it has to be updated there instead. Tenhi6 (talk) 08:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: *not* as above, that said, author requests deletion within 7 days and unused file. ~riley (talk) 18:37, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Not own work because watermarks of bangkokbusclub.com. It also shows the person who scanned the photo, which doesn't quite match up with the uploader. Bebiezaza (talk) 08:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:38, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Not own work because watermarks of bangkokbusclub.com. It also shows the person who took the photo, which doesn't quite match up with the uploader. Bebiezaza (talk) 08:36, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:38, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
This is my photo taken by accident and posted here without permission Max Jenmana (talk) 08:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Disagree Pic of a public figure taken in public space, no need for permission. --Horus (talk) 16:26, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Disagree The right is held by the photographer, NOT the figure in the photo. PolaX3 💬 01:42, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Keep: as above. ~riley (talk) 02:03, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused chart. No context as to when it could be used. Probably not own work. Malcolma (talk) 08:55, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:06, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by AntiCompositeBot as no license (User:AntiCompositeBot/NoLicense/tag) Flor WMCH (talk) 09:39, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- This image needs OTRS verification in French language. The link in the file description contains the rights attribution to the author signaled in the file description (Archives cantonales vaudoises), but the text is in French.--Flor WMCH (talk) 09:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- I have just accepted permission for “File:Gertrude Girard Montet, Pierre Graber, Monsieur de Béthaz.jpg” under ticket:2021042910004994. --Mussklprozz (talk) 09:00, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: Keep per OTRS. Mussklprozz: please do not remove DR tags from the file, either they are both closed or it stays open until an admin comes along. ~riley (talk) 18:41, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
unused selfie Jochen Burghardt (talk) 10:26, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:06, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
unused selfie Jochen Burghardt (talk) 10:27, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:06, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:WWE championship belts
[edit]Copyvio per COM:DW. At least one of them also lacks a licence from the photographer.
- File:Belt European.jpg
- File:Big Gold Belt.JPG
- File:Big-gold-belt-WWE.jpg
- File:Campeonato en Pareja.jpg
- File:Campeonato Intercontinental de la WWE.JPG
- File:Campeonato USA de la WWE.JPG
- File:Ceinture heavy weight wwe.JPG
- File:Cena Spinner Belt.jpg
- File:Classic ic white belt.jpg
- File:ECW World Championship.jpg
- File:IC Championship 2012.jpg
- File:Intercontinental (H.I.).JPG
- File:Million Dollar Championship (2012).jpg
- File:Million Dollar Championship.jpg
- File:NWA&WWF Women's Championship - Moolah.jpg
- File:Silver ECW Championship Belt.JPG
- File:TazECWchampbelt.jpg
- File:The Million Dollar Championship.jpg
- File:Undisputed Championship.jpg
- File:Wttc.jpg
- File:WWE Championship belts 2012 2.jpg
- File:WWE Championship belts 2012.jpg
- File:WWE Championship belts 3.jpg
- File:WWE Championship belts 5.jpg
- File:WWE Divas Championship.jpg
- File:WWE Intercontinental Championship (2011 Classic version).jpg
- File:WWE Light Heavyweight Championship.jpg
- File:WWE Tag Team Championship (2002-2010).jpg
- File:WWE Title.jpg
- File:WWE Unified Tag Team Championship.JPG
- File:WWE United States Championship whitebg.jpg
- File:WWE United States Championship.jpg
- File:WWE Women's Championship (2002-2010).jpg
- File:WWE Women's Championship - LayCool version.jpg
- File:WWE-Spinner-Belt@Commons.jpg
- File:WWEChampionship2.JPG
- File:WWEeuropeanchampionship.jpg
- File:WWETagTitle.jpg
- File:Wwettcb.jpg
- File:WWF attitude Championship.jpg
- File:WWF Championship 1998 - 2002 (original).jpg
- File:WWF Championship 1998 - 2002.jpg
- File:WWF North American Heavyweight Championship.jpg
- File:WWF Undisputed Cahmpionship.jpg
- File:WWF Undisputed Championship transparent.gif
- File:WWF Women's Championship (1998-2002).jpg
- File:WWF Women's Tag Team Championship.jpg
- File:WWF World Ladies Championship.jpg
- File:WWF World Tag Team Championship (1980s-2002).jpg
- File:WWF World Tag Team Championship.jpg
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Stefan4 (talk) 14:33, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I'm the photographer of:
- File:Campeonato en Pareja.jpg
- File:Campeonato Intercontinental de la WWE.JPG
- File:Campeonato USA de la WWE.JPG
- File:WWE Title.jpg
But, if I'm transgressing any license, please delete them. --Mingo edil (talk) 14:57, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- You may be the photographer, but you didn't make the belts. See COM:CB#Awards (inc. belts, medals, and trophies). --Stefan4 (talk) 14:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- That specific section was created just a few days ago. Where was the consensus to add that section to the policy? Feedback (talk) 15:41, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- I didn't notice that the section only was added a few days ago. I saw it referenced somewhere else today. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:48, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Would COM:UA pertain? Do these have a function, or are they purely decorative? Rybec (talk) 03:32, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- the plain belts yes, but the decorative panels on them no. LGA talkedits 04:00, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- That's like saying a T-Shirt is utilitarian, but the images on it are not. Feedback (talk) 18:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- But if I took a plain white t-shirt and made a one off artistic drawing on it I would still own the copyright to it even though I used a t-shirt as a a canvas. LGA talkedits 07:32, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
- That's like saying a T-Shirt is utilitarian, but the images on it are not. Feedback (talk) 18:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- Maybe utilitarian in the United Kingdom, but hardly utilitarian in the United States. A US court found that a w:Stormtrooper (Star Wars) helmet isn't utilitarian whereas a UK court found that the same helmet is utilitarian. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:53, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- Why does US law take precedent over UK law on Commons? Feedback (talk) 18:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- Because the servers are based in the US. LGA talkedits 07:32, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
- Why does US law take precedent over UK law on Commons? Feedback (talk) 18:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- the plain belts yes, but the decorative panels on them no. LGA talkedits 04:00, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- Would COM:UA pertain? Do these have a function, or are they purely decorative? Rybec (talk) 03:32, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- I didn't notice that the section only was added a few days ago. I saw it referenced somewhere else today. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:48, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- That specific section was created just a few days ago. Where was the consensus to add that section to the policy? Feedback (talk) 15:41, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete as derivative works of copyright sports trophy's. Fair use is probably available at enwp. LGA talkedits 04:00, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- I added the section mentioned above. We did discuss it at commons/pump/copyright. I will remove it until we seek a broader consensus to include and/or word it better.--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:36, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Transfer all to the English Wikipedia under Fair Use. Per , there is obviously a precedent. We'll decide if they meet the Fair Use rationale over there. All other Wikipedias which desire the images should also reupload them. Feedback (talk) 02:57, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 04:28, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:WWE championship belts
[edit]DW images of copyright belts.
- File:51xakyS1SBL.jpg
- File:Undisputed belt.png
- File:WWE Championship belt design 2013.jpg
- File:WWE World Heavyweighy Championship.jpg
LGA talkedits 08:07, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and previous discussions. --Krd 08:09, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Files in Category:WWE championship belts
[edit]COM:DW of championship belts. See User:Elcobbola/Awards#Championship_belts for full rationale and previous DRs
- File:Flickr - simononly - The Rock Memorabilia (20).jpg
- File:Flickr - simononly - WWE Fan Axxess - Million Dollar belt.jpg
- File:United States Championship.jpg
- File:WWE Tag Team Championship it was currently used during the "Modern Era" of professional wrestling flagship program WWE-F 2013-08-21 22-50.jpg
- File:WWE World Heavyweight Championship belt.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Эlcobbola talk 15:37, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
- Also, as least one of these is a blatant copyvio: File:WWE Tag Team Championship it was currently used during the "Modern Era" of professional wrestling flagship program WWE-F 2013-08-21 22-50.jpg is here. Эlcobbola talk 15:45, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 00:19, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:WWE championship belts
[edit]COM:DW of belts - see above deletions and/or User:Elcobbola/Awards#Championship_belts for full rationale.
- File:2014-04-03 17-56-10 NEX-6 5548 DxO (13923522215).jpg
- File:2014-04-03 18-38-41 NEX-6 5727 DxO (13924021064).jpg
- File:2014-04-03 18-50-22 NEX-6 5787 DxO (13900490112).jpg
- File:2014-04-03 18-51-15 NEX-6 5796 DxO (13923651563).jpg
- File:2014-04-03 18-51-42 NEX-6 5800 DxO (13900473321).jpg
- File:2014-04-03 18-52-24 NEX-6 5807 DxO (13900502622).jpg
- File:2014-04-03 18-52-56 NEX-6 5811 DxO (13900482171).jpg
- File:2014-04-03 18-53-43 NEX-6 5818 DxO (13900506932).jpg
- File:2014-04-04 18-57-01 NEX-6 7361 DxO (13910554612).jpg
- File:2014-04-04 21-45-14 NEX-6 DSC07754 (13910628986).jpg
- File:Millican Winged Eagle (5603584285).jpg
- File:WrestleMania 32 Axxess 2016-03-31 22-00-47 ILCE-6000 4702 DxO (26361306204).jpg
- File:Wrestlemania Axxess 2012 - Championship Belts (7007047440).jpg
- File:Wrestlemania Axxess 2012 - Championship Belts (7153141877).jpg
- File:Wrestlemania Axxess 2012 - Championship Belts (7153144891).jpg
- File:Wrestlemania Axxess 2012 - Championship Belts (7153147511).jpg
- File:Wrestlemania Axxess 2012 - Championship Belts (7153150877).jpg
- File:Wrestlemania XXX 2015-03-26 18-22-56 ILCE-6000 1991 DxO (17308856655).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Эlcobbola talk 16:28, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 23:03, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:WWE championship belts
[edit]COM:DW of belts - see above deletions and/or User:Elcobbola/Awards#Championship_belts for full rationale.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Эlcobbola talk 21:53, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 13:07, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:WWE championship belts
[edit]- File:NXT North American Championship (cropped).jpg
- File:WWE Intercontinental Championship.jpg
- File:Wendi Richter WWF Women's Championship.jpg
- File:WCW World Tag Team Championship belt.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Files that are similar to those previously listed on this page and similarly are copyvio per COM:DW. Wanchan2020 (talk) 11:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:06, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Random street scenes, all COM:NOTUSED and redundant to hundreds of similar files found elsewhere. All of useful images previously in this category have been moved to Category:Arnaiz Avenue, Category:Amorsolo Street, and Category:Overpass bridges in the Philippines, with some transferred to Category:Buildings in Makati (but, these are filed at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buildings in Makati). If these three unused and random images are to be deleted, this redundant and superflous category will become empty too.
- File:06940jfArnaiz Avenue Amorsolo Street The Columns Legaspi Village Makati Cityfvf 02.jpg
- File:06940jfArnaiz Avenue Amorsolo Street The Columns Legaspi Village Makati Cityfvf 05.jpg
- File:06940jfArnaiz Avenue Amorsolo Street The Columns Legaspi Village Makati Cityfvf 07.jpg
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:02, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:07, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Sakorria does not exist, fantasy diagram, out of project scope Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 12:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:07, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Sakorria does not exist, fantasy diagram, out of project scope Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 12:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:07, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/VillamorAirBasej
[edit]Derivative work copyright violations: images show two billboards advertising two recent movies: 47 Ronin (2013) and Mumbai Love: The Movie (2014). Violation of: graphics production company's artistic copyright and filmmaking firms' movie promotion rights.
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:31, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:07, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
fake photo, of a musical group with low reknown, out of scope Pippobuono (talk) 14:05, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete - Can't find it on the internet, it looks like the nominator is right. - Richardkiwi (talk) (talk) 16:50, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:07, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/atomtetsuwan2002
[edit]Flickr user posts 3rd party photos (usually clearly credited to photo agencies) - Creative Commons licenses are invalid.
- File:Rachel Nichols on the set of Continuum in Vancouver, B.C. (22648746285).jpg
- File:Rachel Nichols on the set of Continuum in Vancouver, B.C. (22635201662).jpg
- File:Rachel Nichols on the set of Continuum in Vancouver, B.C. (22027600183).jpg
- File:Linda Cardellini 2007 (19281080106) 03.jpg
- File:Linda Cardellini 2007 (19307137805).jpg
- File:Linda Cardellini 2007 (19301155612).jpg
- File:Linda Cardellini 2007 (19121027249).jpg
- File:Linda Cardellini 2007 (19281080106) 01.jpg
- File:Rachel Nichols on the set of Continuum in Vancouver, B.C. (22025974654).jpg
- File:Rachel Nichols on the set of Continuum in Vancouver, B.C. (22027601423).jpg
- File:Rachel Nichols on the set of Continuum in Vancouver, B.C. (22025975654).jpg
- File:Linda Cardellini 2007 (19311015561).jpg
- File:Rachel Nichols on the set of Continuum in Vancouver, B.C. (22635201522).jpg
- File:Rachel Nichols on the set of Continuum in Vancouver, B.C. (22460809130).jpg
- File:Linda Cardellini 2007 (19281080106) 02.jpg
- File:Rachel Nichols on the set of Continuum in Vancouver, B.C. (22025975654) (cropped).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_03.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_01.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_02.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Ytoyoda (talk) 18:42, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:21, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
Files found with Special:Search/atomtetsuwan2002
[edit]See Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with atomtetsuwan2002, from a COM:FLICKRWASH account. The Lauren Ambrose photo is credited to Starz and the Dalida photo is from 1975, clearly not originally from Flickr.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Ytoyoda (talk) 14:34, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:08, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:08, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from modern art.
- File:Minotaure - Museum of Kyoto, 2006.jpg
- File:Installation Flower by Aki Kuroda - Japon.jpg
- File:Exposition à la Richard Taittinger Gallery - 2020.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:39, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:08, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Used in vanity article. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:42, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:46, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:42, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Pavel Siliézar (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
- File:Pavel Ricardo Siliézar Miranda .jpg
- File:Pavel Ricardo Siliézar Miranda el arqueólogo.jpg
- File:Pavel Ricardo Siliézar Miranda el filosofo.jpg
- File:Pavel Ricardo Siliézar Miranda en Valle Palajunoj.jpg
- File:Pavel Ricardo Siliézar Miranda el fotógrafo.jpg
- File:Pavel Ricardo Siliézar Miranda con una vieja fotografía.jpg
- File:Pavel Ricardo Siliézar Miranda el fiestero.jpg
- File:Pavel Ricardo Siliézar Miranda.jpg
- File:Pavel Ricardo Siliézar Miranda en Pasabien, Zacapa.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:47, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:42, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Used in vanity draft. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:51, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:43, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:55, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:43, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Logo of a student business which the user has started, which is not relevant to Wikipedia. Uploaded with the sole purpose of promoting this student business on nowiki. Te og kaker (talk) 18:05, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:08, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Logo of a student business which the user has started, which is not relevant to Wikipedia. Uploaded with the sole purpose of promoting this student business on nowiki. Te og kaker (talk) 18:05, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Prithivraj (talk · contribs)
[edit]Likely not own works: inconsistent sizes, quality, and styles, missing EXIF data, and obvious crops.
- File:K. Balakrishnan (CPI-M).jpg
- File:S K Murugavel Rajan.jpg
- File:T Velmurugan.jpg
- File:N.Velappan Nair.jpg
- File:M. H. Jawahirullah.jpg
- File:E.R.Eswaran.jpg
- File:K. M. Kader Mohideen.jpg
- File:R.Mutharasan.jpg
- File:K.S.Alagiri.jpg
- File:PNK Flag.jpg
- File:LMurugan.jpg
- File:S Ramadoss EPS.jpg
- File:Aa-Cover-98b9qgavkd2nnhgkh4b2co6094-20200304024246.Medi.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:19, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 18:43, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Non-free logo. No source for CC-BY-SA-4.0 license. The same image is uploaded as fair use in elwiki (el:File:Crestkallitheafootballclub.png) --Geraki TLG 07:07, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, the source is fr:Fichier:GS Kallithéa (logo).svg where it is uploaded as fair use. Thuresson (talk) 19:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
No mention that WGIGP allowed to use the file Andrei (talk) 08:46, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, per nomination. Thuresson (talk) 19:17, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Not own work and no permission is provided Andrei (talk) 08:47, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, per nomination. Thuresson (talk) 19:18, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Pictures without camera details tend to be suspect. We require a very much better declaration of source and/or permissions. See COM:OTRS. Potential copyright violation. Badly focussed Timtrent (talk) 10:29, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, per nomination. Used for a rejected draft at en:User:Sriram2003/sandbox. Thuresson (talk) 19:21, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
This is an old logo for a Swedish ice hockey club. It might be public domain, but it is not own work Machatjkala (talk) 10:38, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, per nomination. Thuresson (talk) 19:23, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:36, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, per nomination. Thuresson (talk) 19:38, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
I want do Savadogoaly33 (talk) 15:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, same day nomination by uploader. Thuresson (talk) 19:40, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:27, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, somebody's school project. Thuresson (talk) 19:42, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:29, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, somebody's school assignment. Thuresson (talk) 19:43, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:29, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, user photo of a user with an insignificant number of Wikimedia edits. Thuresson (talk) 19:46, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Copyright belongs to WireImage, not Gamescoreblog: https://www.flickr.com/photos/66327609@N00/501443192/ Ytoyoda (talk) 16:28, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted. [www.wireimage.com/celebrity-pictures/Channing-Tatum-and-Aisha-Tyler-during-Xbox-360-Halo-3-Sneak-Preview/451747637?r=451747637&st=Search wireimage.com]: "Image:#451747637 Caption: Channing Tatum and Aisha Tyler during Xbox 360 Halo 3 Sneak Preview - Red Carpet and Inside at Quixote Studios in West Hollywood, California, United States. (Photo by Chris Weeks/WireImage). May 16 2007." Thuresson (talk) 19:53, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
poor-quality (blurred) photo of handwritten calculation in Russian; should better be typeset as text directly in a Wikipedia article, if needed Jochen Burghardt (talk) 19:57, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted, per nomination. Thuresson (talk) 19:54, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Uploader is not the maker/owner of the rights to the picture Saschaporsche (talk) 20:16, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted by Fitindia at 07:34, 7 Mai 2021 UTC: No permission since 29 April 2021 --Krdbot 20:39, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
duplicate loaded in error Victuallers (talk) 14:44, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: and redirected. --JuTa 09:48, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
duplicate loaded in error Victuallers (talk) 14:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: and redirected. --JuTa 09:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
duplicate loaded in error Victuallers (talk) 14:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: and redirected. --JuTa 09:49, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Duplication of File:ออกพระพรหมบุรี (เพียง เเจ้งสุคง (พรหมบุริย)).jpg Bitterschoko (talk) 06:38, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:17, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
The file is a Chinese version of the Communist Manifesto translated by Bo Gu (died on 1946-04-08), which enters Chinese public domain in 1996-04-08 according to Template:PD-China, barely exceeds the URAA date of 1996-01-01, and is not in US public domain.
As the file is uploaded after 2012-03-01, the file is also not eligible for review under Template:Not-PD-US-URAA. The file is therefore eligible for copyright in the United States, and should be deleted. 廣九直通車 (talk) 07:25, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- That said, as Chinese Wikisource allows the existence of this file according to their "passive tolerance" (消極容忍) policy, the file can be considered to be moved to Chinese Wikisource as a local file.廣九直通車 (talk) 07:28, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Oppose: @廣九直通車: A mere allegation that the URAA applies to a file cannot be the sole reason for deletion.--維基小霸王 (talk) 07:31, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Support To finish that quote: "A mere allegation that the URAA applies to a file cannot be the sole reason for deletion. If the end result of copyright evaluation is that there is significant doubt about the freedom of a file under U.S. or local law, the file must be deleted in line with the precautionary principle." Is there any significant doubt about the lack of freedom of this file under US law?--Prosfilaes (talk) 14:07, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
- You mean the the lack of freedom of this file under US law because communism is forbidden in USA?--維基小霸王 (talk) 04:28, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
- meta:Wikimedia_Foundation_Legal_department/Wikimedia_Server_Location_and_Free_Knowledge"So WMF does not see a reason to delete content simply because of general concern about the URAA. If we receive a valid takedown notice or get actual knowledge of infringement, we will do a full legal analysis of the work based on all the relevant information that is presented in that notice and vigorously resist any invalid notices." meta:United_States_non-acceptance_of_the_rule_of_the_shorter_term#Statement_from_Wikimedia_Foundation allows "No active enforcement" option: "Just tag potentially affected works and wait for any office actions to answer formal takedown requests."--維基小霸王 (talk) 04:40, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Based on precedent such as Commons:Deletion_requests/File:1950_Mao_and_Liu.jpg, Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Beijing Subway Phase 1 Construction Ceremony.jpg, Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Actresses_from_Argentina, among others, this file should be deleted, unless a more recent policy supersedes the policies applied in these deletion requests. --ShyAlpaca482 (talk) 11:33, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- The file should be kept based on precedent such as:
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Early Chinese bodybuilding.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/Pictures of Chang Liyi
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Three Women poster.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Min Huifen youth.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hao Jianxiu.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Guo Chaoren.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hao Jianxiu in textile mill.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Xin Fengxia and Wu Zuguang.jpg
- unless a more recent policy supersedes the policies applied in these deletion requests. All of these URAA-affected files were kept.
- I know some people hate communism and want to delete such files anyway.. That's McCarthyism. I think you should regard the Manifesto as an important historical document, they are here to record history rather than spreading any ideology. --維基小霸王 (talk) 02:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- It has nothing to do with Communism, which is not illegal in the US. It is a simple fact of copyright law, where the US, like a number of other countries, doesn't cheat foreigners out of years of their copyright just because their home country has shorter terms of copyright.--Prosfilaes (talk) 05:10, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- There is a number of precedents for Keeping URAA-affected files. If one have to be stricter on this file, it is McCarthyism.--維基小霸王 (talk) 05:41, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- There are a number of precedents for deleting URAA-affected files as well, and it is the letter of the law. The fact that some works are treated by the rules and some aren't is not an argument to treat another work differently.--Prosfilaes (talk) 14:30, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
- meta:Wikimedia_Foundation_Legal_department/Wikimedia_Server_Location_and_Free_Knowledge"So WMF does not see a reason to delete content simply because of general concern about the URAA. If we receive a valid takedown notice or get actual knowledge of infringement, we will do a full legal analysis of the work based on all the relevant information that is presented in that notice and vigorously resist any invalid notices." Law is the concern of WMF. They will delete the file if they receive a valid take down notice from copyright owner. Your own interpretations of law is not a substitute of policy by WMF. --維基小霸王 (talk) 04:04, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- There are a number of precedents for deleting URAA-affected files as well, and it is the letter of the law. The fact that some works are treated by the rules and some aren't is not an argument to treat another work differently.--Prosfilaes (talk) 14:30, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
- There is a number of precedents for
- It has nothing to do with Communism, which is not illegal in the US. It is a simple fact of copyright law, where the US, like a number of other countries, doesn't cheat foreigners out of years of their copyright just because their home country has shorter terms of copyright.--Prosfilaes (talk) 05:10, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- The file should be kept based on precedent such as:
Kept: A mere allegation that the URAA applies to a file cannot be the sole reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 11:02, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Not own work; clearly screenshoted (maybe from YouTube) Bebiezaza (talk) 11:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:30, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Not own work; clearly screenshoted from YouTube Bebiezaza (talk) 11:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:30, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:Buildings in Makati
[edit]Modern and contemporary w:Makati buildings. Missing architects' permissions. Undelete once FOP is introduced here.
- File:07476jfSan Lorenzo Amorsolo Arnaiz Avenue Skyway Junction Makati Cityfvf 29.jpg
- File:07476jfSan Lorenzo Amorsolo Arnaiz Avenue Skyway Junction Makati Cityfvf 28.jpg
- File:06989jfAmorsolo Street Creek Bridge San Lorenzo Church Stations Makati Cityfvf 12.jpg
- File:06854jfMetro Manila Skyway Arnaiz Avenue Amorsolo Street Pio del Pilar San Lorenzo Makati Cityfvf 36.jpg
- File:07476jfSan Lorenzo Amorsolo Arnaiz Avenue Skyway Junction Makati Cityfvf 25.jpg
- File:07476jfSan Lorenzo Amorsolo Arnaiz Avenue Skyway Junction Makati Cityfvf 20.jpg
- File:06854jfMetro Manila Skyway Arnaiz Avenue Amorsolo Street Pio del Pilar San Lorenzo Makati Cityfvf 39.jpg
- File:07476jfSan Lorenzo Amorsolo Arnaiz Avenue Skyway Junction Makati Cityfvf 24.jpg
- File:07476jfSan Lorenzo Amorsolo Arnaiz Avenue Skyway Junction Makati Cityfvf 23.jpg
- File:07476jfSan Lorenzo Amorsolo Arnaiz Avenue Skyway Junction Makati Cityfvf 21.jpg
- File:MAKATI NEAR SWISS EMBASSY 2012 - panoramio.jpg
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:30, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FOP. The building's architect died in 1994. See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Tanghalang Pambansa. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:34, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:39, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Ich habe diese Datei vor knapp zwei Jahren auf der Spielwiese von Wikipedia hochgeladen, also nur zum testen. Ich möchte die Datei nicht längerfristig in Commons / Wikipedia drinhaben. CLPgyralvX (talk) 12:52, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Support Not obviously useful for any Wikimedia project. Thuresson (talk) 19:25, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Not own work; clearly screenshoted from YouTube Bebiezaza (talk) 12:59, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
personal photos, out of scope Pippobuono (talk) 14:02, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
See COM:PACKAGING.
Ytoyoda (talk) 14:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE selfie. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:52, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:32, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
unused selfie Jochen Burghardt (talk) 19:58, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:33, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
unused selfie Jochen Burghardt (talk) 20:02, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 11:33, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
1. Not own work; screenshot from YouTube Bebiezaza (talk) 09:48, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted, ineligible for copyright due to simplicity, but I delete it as out of project scope. Also I blocked the uploader indefinitely for abusing multiple accounts – and I blocked 2 sockpuppets as well. Taivo (talk) 11:16, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
Thai Airways logo, which is copyrighted, just recolored. AND other reasons in the nomination page. Bebiezaza (talk) 14:16, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Per the log of Thai Airways logo previously uploaded to Commons, it was decided that uploading Thai Airways logo to Commons is not acceptable due to copyright violation.
- According to the Thai Airways style guide on page 16, the picture uploaded is an incorrect version of the logo, which breaks the following:
- "wordmark used in tinted variations"
- wrong use of colours (which is decided through "Exchange of colours within symbol & wordmark" and "Wrong use of corporate colours", together with "wordmark used in tinted variations")
- (I could be bias here) in which, this could damage the image of Thai Airways, especially in the middle of restructuring and many people criticising the company right now. --Bebiezaza (talk) 14:28, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted, surpasses threshold of originality. Taivo (talk) 11:18, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
Das Werk stammt aus der Kamera eines Freundes, der nicht damit einverstanden ist, es hier in der Wikipedia zu präsentieren. Die Lizenz ist somit hinfällig. Das Bild soll daher gelöscht werden. Bundesstefan (talk) 22:07, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Der Kollege verkraftet gerade nicht, dass sein Bild auf de:Arthur Delfosse entfernt wurde und ist deswegen gerade in Rage, siehe de:Diskussion:Arthur_Delfosse, [1], [2]. Von daher halte ich die Begründung nicht für stichhaltig, wobei es auch keine Rolle spielt, wem die Kamera gehört. Der Antrag ist abzulehnen. --ɱ 23:34, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Das ist ein Pseudo-Löschantrag des Fotoerstellers, weil er sich geärgert hat, siehe Beitrag von Mirji. --Nicola (talk) 05:20, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ich habe das Bild ohne jegliche Erlaubnis hochgeladen. Es kann doch jetzt nicht Euer Ernst sein, Bilder in der Wiki zu behalten, ohne gültige Lizenz! Es ist nicht Mein Bild, sondern das eines Freundes, der dort fotografiert hat und dessen Kamera es ist. Ja, ich ärgere mich, dass das Bild im entsprechenden Artikel nicht zur Verwendung kam, jedoch hat das durchaus seine Berechtigung, wie wir in der Diskussion erfahren haben. Desweiteren ist es vom Ersteller nicht genehmigt worden, es hier hochzuladen. Ich habe viele grobe Fehler in der Wiki veranstaltet, u.a. das unerlaubte Hochladen des Bildes. Die Lizenz wurde vom Ersteller zurückgezogen. Das Bild ist somit zu löschen. Bundesstefan (talk) 07:33, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Das ist ein Pseudo-Löschantrag des Fotoerstellers, weil er sich geärgert hat, siehe Beitrag von Mirji. --Nicola (talk) 05:20, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Hallo, ich bin der fotograf des bildes, es wurde 2013 fotograffiert, ich wurde von dem uploader kontaktiert das es hier ohne meine erlaubnis verwendet wird, ich habe hier leider keinen acount und kenne die gepflogenheiten nicht, da ich bisher nur wikipedia-Leser bin. Ich lehne die Benutzung meines Bildes hiermit ab und fordere zur löschung innerhalb von 7 Tagen auf, da ich sonst einen Anwalt kontaktieren werde. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.221.58.22 (talk) 07:59, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ach komm, sich jetzt auszuloggen wird albern, liebe Bundeswehr-IP. Bundesstefans Bilder um 2013 herum stammen wie dieses einige aus der gleichen Kamera, wie z.b. File:D-AIBG_(aircraft)_-_Kirchheim_unter_Teck.jpg und File:CrystalSerenityNorgeFjord.jpg. Typischer Verstoß gegen de:WP:BNS. Sollte der Löschantrag stattgegeben werden, müssen neben den bereits genannten auch die Bilder File:Cisitalia D46.jpg und File:Denzel 1500 Sport International.jpg mit gleicher Löschbegründung gelöscht werden. User:Bundesstefan, möchtest du das wirklich? --ɱ 09:29, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
_-_Kirchheim_unter_Teck.jpg){kind=link}
- Offenbar geht es hier um den Upload eines bestimmten Bildes, welches nicht mit den Bedingungen der Wikipedia vereinbar ist. Punkt. Nicht um andere Bilder einer gleichen Kamera. Wenn sich die Diskussion hier ausdehnt auf alle oben genannten Bilder und somit und auch erst dann das Recht des ursprünglichen Urhebers gewahrt bleibt, nehme ich als Uploader der Bilder das in Kauf. In der Wiki ist folgendes geregelt: [[3]]. Dort ist u.a. zu lesen: "Um Zweifelsfälle zu vermeiden, wird bei der Anfrage an Rechteinhaber die Verwendung der allgemeinen Einverständniserklärung unter Wikipedia:Textvorlagen dringend empfohlen". Eine Einverständniserklärung gab und gibt es nicht. Das Gegenteil ist der Fall. Weiter ist geregelt: "Wenn der Urheber die Verwertungsrechte nicht abgetreten hat (z. B. wenn ein Photograph ein Bild an eine Bildagentur verkauft oder er als Mitglied einer Verwertungsgesellschaft mit ihr einen Wahrnehmungsvertrag geschlossen hat), dann ist er der alleinige Rechteinhaber". Dieser Satz ist selbsterklärend. Als Hilfenahme ist der im Artikel beschriebene Entscheidungsbaum hilfreich: "Hast Du das Bild selbst erstellt?": Nein. "Ist der Urheber des Bildes bekannt?": Ja. "Ist der Urheber vor mehr als 70 Jahren verstorben?": Nein. "Hat der Urheber des Bildes zugestimmt, das Bild unter eine freie Lizenz zu stellen?": Nein. "Nicht hochladen.". Desweiteren wurden im Vorfeld keine Anfragen an den Rechteinhaber (und schon gar nicht über das OTRS) weitergeleitet.
- Rechtlich gesehen befinden wir uns außerhalb der Möglichkeiten, das Bild hier weiter zu nutzen. Die Rechtslage wird in der Wikipedia klar formuliert und ist so umzusetzen.
- Ganz pragmatisch gesehen: Das Bild ohne Nutzung in Artikeln ist relativ sinnlos. Daher stellt sich mir die Frage, warum ausgerechnet jetzt so sehr daran festgehalten wird, das Bild ohne Recht zu behalten und sich im Zweifel strafbar zu machen? Ihr als Administratoren und Entscheider habt doch die Verantwortung über die einwandfreie rechtliche Umsetzung und falls Zweifel bestehen, gilt doch stets das Motto "Im Zweifel nie". Bundesstefan (talk) 10:49, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ok, wenn du hier Bilder ohne Genehmigung einstellst, rege ich zusätzlich zur Löschung aller mit betreffender Kamera geschossener Bilder wegen Missachtung der Projektregeln eine unbeschränkte Sperre von User:Bundesstefan an. --ɱ 11:03, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Das kannst Du gerne tun, nützt aber nichts zu Klärung dieses Sachverhaltes. Wenn Du gerne so unliebsame Autoren loswerden möchtest, ist das einen Versuch wert. Trotzdem möchte ich Dich bitten, sachlich beim Thema zu bleiben. Bundesstefan (talk) 11:11, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ok, wenn du hier Bilder ohne Genehmigung einstellst, rege ich zusätzlich zur Löschung aller mit betreffender Kamera geschossener Bilder wegen Missachtung der Projektregeln eine unbeschränkte Sperre von User:Bundesstefan an. --ɱ 11:03, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ganz pragmatisch gesehen: Das Bild ohne Nutzung in Artikeln ist relativ sinnlos. Daher stellt sich mir die Frage, warum ausgerechnet jetzt so sehr daran festgehalten wird, das Bild ohne Recht zu behalten und sich im Zweifel strafbar zu machen? Ihr als Administratoren und Entscheider habt doch die Verantwortung über die einwandfreie rechtliche Umsetzung und falls Zweifel bestehen, gilt doch stets das Motto "Im Zweifel nie". Bundesstefan (talk) 10:49, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Eine Kamera gleichen Typs hat der Uploager schon öfter verwendet: File:Moor bei Ostrittrum.jpg, File:F222 - Baden-Württemberg.JPG, File:AS Cypria (ship, 2006).jpg, File:Rio Blanco (ship, 2009) at Port of Hamburg.jpg, File:D-AIBG (aircraft) - Kirchheim unter Teck.jpg, File:Seeigel Gebiss.jpg, File:Cisitalia D46.jpg, File:Denzel 1500 Sport International.jpg. Ich halte den Löschantrag für unglaubwürdig. Gruss --Nightflyer (talk) 11:25, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
_at_Port_of_Hamburg.jpg){kind=link}
- Eine Kamera des gleichen Typs? Das entwickelt sich hier zum Indizienprozess oder wie? Wikipedia behält nicht Bilder aufgrund von Indizien sondern aufgrund einwandfreier Lizenzfreigaben! Was soll das??? Der Standpunkt ist klar sowie die Wiki-Vorgaben. Indizien sind keine Beweise! Nochmal: Warum sollte ausgerechnet jetzt so sehr am Bild festgehalten werden, ohne Artikelnutzung und ohne (eurerseits) geklärte Urheberrechtsfragen? Bundesstefan (talk) 11:31, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Wir könnten auch User:Ralf Roletschek bitten, forensisch zu klären, ob die Bilder aus der identischen Kamera stammen oder nicht. Für die Bilder File:Cisitalia D46.jpg und File:Denzel 1500 Sport International.jpg hätte ich gern jetzt den Löschantrag von dir gesehen, da sie aus der gleichen Serie wie dieses stammen. Das Denzel-Bild wurde 3 Minuten vor diesem aufgenommen, das Cisitalia ca 20 Minuten nach diesem. Für diese dürftest du ja ebensowenig Urheber sein, wenn deine hier präsentierte Geschichte stimmt. --ɱ 12:31, 30 April 2021 (UTC) PS: Das Bild ist nicht sinnlos. Kurt Delfosse ist relevant und sobald ein Artikel über ihn geschrieben wird, ist dieses Bild von Interesse.
- Alle Bilder sind von Interesse, ob für einen Artikel oder nicht, da sie dokumentieren. Man könnte übrigens auch einen Artikel über das Auto selbst schreiben.
- Das ist hier ohnehin eine Phantomdebatte: Der Benutzer will andere hinters Licht führen, das ist offensichtlich. --Nicola (talk) 13:07, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Wir könnten auch User:Ralf Roletschek bitten, forensisch zu klären, ob die Bilder aus der identischen Kamera stammen oder nicht. Für die Bilder File:Cisitalia D46.jpg und File:Denzel 1500 Sport International.jpg hätte ich gern jetzt den Löschantrag von dir gesehen, da sie aus der gleichen Serie wie dieses stammen. Das Denzel-Bild wurde 3 Minuten vor diesem aufgenommen, das Cisitalia ca 20 Minuten nach diesem. Für diese dürftest du ja ebensowenig Urheber sein, wenn deine hier präsentierte Geschichte stimmt. --ɱ 12:31, 30 April 2021 (UTC) PS: Das Bild ist nicht sinnlos. Kurt Delfosse ist relevant und sobald ein Artikel über ihn geschrieben wird, ist dieses Bild von Interesse.
- Eine Kamera des gleichen Typs? Das entwickelt sich hier zum Indizienprozess oder wie? Wikipedia behält nicht Bilder aufgrund von Indizien sondern aufgrund einwandfreier Lizenzfreigaben! Was soll das??? Der Standpunkt ist klar sowie die Wiki-Vorgaben. Indizien sind keine Beweise! Nochmal: Warum sollte ausgerechnet jetzt so sehr am Bild festgehalten werden, ohne Artikelnutzung und ohne (eurerseits) geklärte Urheberrechtsfragen? Bundesstefan (talk) 11:31, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Eine plausible Antwort auf folgende Fragen vonseiten des Antragstellers würde mich interessieren:
- Wie ist es zu erklären, daß Du, Deiner eigenen Erklärung folgend, bisher auf weitere, im engen zeitlichen Zusammenhang stehende Bilder, keinen LA gestellt hast?
- Wie konnte es überhaupt zu dieser falschen Erklärung kommen, für die bereits weitreichende Sanktionen gefordert wurden?
Vielleicht ist es am Einfachsten, Du redest noch mal mit Deinem Kumpel und ziehst dann gesichtswahrend den LA zurück. Eloquenzministerium (talk) 14:08, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Löschantrag wurde gestellt für die restlichen Bilder. Welche falsche Erklärung meinst Du? Bundesstefan (talk) 14:40, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Gut sechs Stunden sind eine lange Zeit, daher nochmal zur Erinnerung Deine Worte von weiter oben:
- „Ich habe das Bild ohne jegliche Erlaubnis hochgeladen. Es kann doch jetzt nicht Euer Ernst sein, Bilder in der Wiki zu behalten, ohne gültige Lizenz! Es ist nicht Mein Bild, sondern das eines Freundes, der dort fotografiert hat und dessen Kamera es ist.“
- Da wir hier zunächst mal nicht anders können, als uns auf die Versicherung der Richtigkeit der Lizenzangaben zu verlassen, wird es für so schwerwiegende Regelverletzungen sicher angemessene Konsequenzen geben. Wenn Du also das Bild von einem Freund als Dein eigenes ausgibt, was aufgrund Deiner Aussage auch nicht strittig ist, wirst Du mit den Sanktionen leben müssen. Eloquenzministerium (talk) 15:22, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Ich habe das Bild hochgeladen, ja. Ich habe diesen Fehler selbst erkannt und mich quasi selbst "angezeigt" und stehe aufrichtig zu meinem Fehler. Wenn Konsequenzen drohen, muß ich diese wohl hinnehmen. Hauptsache, wir begeben uns wieder aus dem rechtsfreien Raum. Ich nehme an, die Konsequenzen folgen in Personalunion von Dir? Bundesstefan (talk) 16:26, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Ich werde mich drum kümmern, bitte noch nicht löschen, bin unterwegs. Ralf Roletschek 16:27, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete: Uploader's request a few hours after upload. Leute, wenn ihr meint, ihr könnt den widerwärtigen Stil, der inzwischen auf de:wp gang und gäbe ist, hierher transferieren, habt ihr euch getäuscht. Ich könnte die Datei sofort auch ohne SLA regelkonform löschen. Mach ich aber nicht, damit ihr noch etwas Gelegenheit habt, euch gegenseitig anzumachen. --Achim (talk) 19:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Achim55: Die Ansprache "Leute" ist nicht angebracht, da es sich lediglich um einen Benutzer handelt, der eine "widerwärtigen Stil" an den Tag legt. Bitte lass Dich über die Umstände, die mit diesem Foto zusammmenhängen, informieren. Vielleicht hilft das weiter. Dein Stil ist übrigens auch nicht gerade das Gelbe vom Ei. --Nicola (talk) 19:55, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Es gibt ja noch 37 weitere deutschsprachige Administratoren und es ist begrüßenswert, wenn dies hier jemensch mit genügend Unvoreingenommenheit & dewiki-Erfahrung entscheidet. --ɱ 23:17, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: Trotz der langen Diskussion ist dieser Fall recht einfach: Gemäss COM:CSD#G7 sind Uploader berechtigt, bis zu 7 Tage nach dem Upload die Schnelllöschung ihres Uploads zu verlangen, wenn sie ihre Meinung ändern, vorausgesetzt, das Bild ist nicht in Verwendung: "Original author or uploader requests deletion of recently created (<7 days) unused content." Dieses Foto wird gegenwärtig nur auf einer Diskussionsseite verwendet, was ich mal als "unused" werte. Es wäre somit zum Zeitpunkt seiner Nominierung sowieso schnellöschbar gewesen, auf einfachen Wunsch des Uploaders, die ganze Diskussion ist damit irrelevant. Der Uploader hätte halt besser gleich einen speedy deletion request gestellt. Andere Fotos dieses Uploaders sind allerdings in Verwendung und können daher nicht gestützt auf COM:CSD#G7 gelöscht werden. / Despite the long discussion, this case is quite simple: Per COM:CSD#G7, uploaders have the right to request speedy deletion if they change their mind for 7 days after the upload, given the image is unused. This photo is currently used only on a talk page, which I will consider as "unused". So this file would have been eligible for speedy deletion anyway, simply per wish of the uploader at the time of nomination, the entire discussion is irrelevant. Uploader should just have used a speedy deletion request. Other photos by this uploader are in use, however, and therefore can't be deleted based on COM:CSD#G7. --Gestumblindi (talk) 15:46, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
I made a svg file of this map. TylerKutschbach (talk) 23:41, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:19, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
The fire in this logo is not a "simple geometric shape" and even the position of each ornament includes some originality so I dispute that "this logo image does not meet the threshold of originality" to be protected by copyright. Geraki TLG 07:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:19, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Tokyo Route 403 -01.jpg. The author is not "不明" (=unknown). Yuraily Lic (talk) 08:02, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:19, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Not own work and no permission is provided Andrei (talk) 08:47, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Not own work and no permission is provided Andrei (talk) 08:47, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Bad quality Z. Gruszka (talk) 09:26, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Missvain (talk) 00:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
unused; can be replaced by template ((diagonal split header|source|dest)) Jochen Burghardt (talk) 10:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of scope, user's only contribution Mjrmtg (talk) 10:39, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
non-free, taken from https://www.jagran.com/jammu-and-kashmir/jammu-kashmir-pacer-mujtaba-yousuf-called-for-trials-by-mumbai-indians-21290851.html Lugnuts (talk) 12:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Unfortunately, no Freedom of Panorama in Russia for sculptures. Looks like unfree sculpture. A.Savin 12:56, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
This Einhell logo is outdated and should be replaced by the new word and design mark. Einhellag (talk) 13:24, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Not uploaders own work. Several matches with TinEye and google. GeorgHH • talk 13:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Per COM:PACKAGING. Ytoyoda (talk) 14:38, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
No metadata, uploaded by a LTA, this probably is copyvio and not own-work
stanglavine msg 14:52, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:24, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of scope- covers of releases by apparently non-notable artist/band with no obvious use on Commons.
- File:X abf896e1.jpg - Is the source artwork theirs and freely-usable? *If* that is the case, there might be a case to keep this if the text is removed
- File:X 04801b3d.jpg - Obvious derivative of File:Compactcassette.jpg (exact same source- note that the loose tape in window is identical)
- File:Kurenie.jpg
- File:X 4097b73d.jpg
- File:Обложка Дэниел Пол - Иней (2011).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Ubcule (talk) 14:54, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:26, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:58, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:26, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
uploader request — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelHadiGram (talk • contribs) 15:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:35, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to be own work: by the nature of these photos it appears the photographer is not the uploader. COM:OTRS consent for use of commercial licensing from the photographer is required. Note that Commons doesn't accept noncommercial or fair use licensing (in case the photographer insists he doesn't want CC-BY / CC-BY-SA / PD commercial licenses).
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 15:26, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:50, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:36, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:50, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Blatant copyright violation, too complicated to fall under trademark ···日本穣Talk to Nihonjoe 16:00, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:50, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:Ulitsa Dybenko metrostation
[edit]Unfortunately there is no Freedom of Panorama in Russia for works of art. This mosaique was created about 1985, and it is not free.
- File:View of the side panel view of Dybenko street station 2.jpg
- File:View of the side panel view of Dybenko street station.jpg
- File:View on the center of Ulitsa Dybenko station 02.jpg
- File:View on the center of Ulitsa Dybenko station 20210417.jpg
A.Savin 16:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:51, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
A better version exists at File:Black Panther by Bruce McAdam.jpg Boylarva99 (talk) 16:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
sorry, my upload is a duplicate — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fransvannes (talk • contribs) 14:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
File:Fanon et M'Hamed Yazid représentant le FLN à la conférence Pan Africaine en Kinshasa le 27 août 1960.jpg
[edit]
This is a copyright violation. Link given in description clearly says the rights of this photo belong to United Press International and AFP press agencies. No evidence this photo was "first published" in the DRC according to the licensing tag Indy beetle (talk) 16:58, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
It is not to be own work, the uploader claims this, see huwiki: hu:Szerkesztővita:Mathae#Fájl:VillamosAlexandria.jpg. Regasterios (talk) 17:24, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
حذف سریع آفرینش های هنری فانوس (talk) 17:24, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 00:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Needs proof from the author of this scheme. PereslavlFoto (talk) 17:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:01, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
personal image and useless for wikipeida Hoseina051311 (talk) 18:08, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:00, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
File:Rossano Puddu (a sinistra) con Tony Piaceri (al centro) con la Coppa per il ballo sardo.jpg
[edit]_con_Tony_Piaceri_(al_centro)_con_la_Coppa_per_il_ballo_sardo.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_con_Tony_Piaceri_(al_centro)_con_la_Coppa_per_il_ballo_sardo.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Scan or photo of older photo, not own work. And not notable, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
unused promotional image Jochen Burghardt (talk) 19:49, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
should better be typeset as text Jochen Burghardt (talk) 19:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%8F%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%97%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BB%D0%B8.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%8F%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%97%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%BB%D0%B8.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
should better be typeset as text Jochen Burghardt (talk) 19:59, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Притяжение_Земли.png){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Притяжение_Земли.png){kind=link}
%D0%A2%D0%95%D0%A5%D0%9D%D0%9E%D0%9B%D0%9E%D0%93%D0%98%D0%AF_%D0%A0%D0%90%D0%A1%D0%A9%D0%95%D0%9F%D0%9B%D0%95%D0%9D%D0%98%D0%AF_%D0%9D%D0%A3%D0%9A%D0%9B%D0%9E%D0%9D%D0%9E%D0%92.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
%D0%A2%D0%95%D0%A5%D0%9D%D0%9E%D0%9B%D0%9E%D0%93%D0%98%D0%AF_%D0%A0%D0%90%D0%A1%D0%A9%D0%95%D0%9F%D0%9B%D0%95%D0%9D%D0%98%D0%AF_%D0%9D%D0%A3%D0%9A%D0%9B%D0%9E%D0%9D%D0%9E%D0%92.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
should better be typeset as text Jochen Burghardt (talk) 20:00, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
should better be typeset as text Jochen Burghardt (talk) 20:00, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
should better be typeset as text Jochen Burghardt (talk) 20:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:10, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
File:Tot in de Vezel - Peter George d'Angelino Tap, Atrium 's Gravenhage 2012 (bron Ed Jansen).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Uploader is not the maker/owner of the rights to the picture Saschaporsche (talk) 20:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Uploader is not the maker/owner of the rights to the picture Saschaporsche (talk) 20:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:21, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
See COM:PACKAGING Ytoyoda (talk) 20:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:21, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 22:12, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:25, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Unclear source; this appears to be a promotional image and is unlikely to be the uploader's own work. Nathan2055talk - contribs 22:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 01:26, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Was a quick delete request. Uploader claims in Ticket:2021042610008236 that the images are under cc-by-sa on the source site. I cannot judge on this due to my lack of knowledge of the Russian language. Can someone with a knowledge of Russian please deal with it? I moved to the ticket to the Russian queue as well.
- File:Владимир Бараненков.jpg
- File:Александр Абакумов.jpg
- File:Михаил Горбатов.jpg
- File:Эйдол в 2019 году.jpg
- File:Логотип группы Эйдол.jpg
Mussklprozz (talk) 09:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: still no OTRS confirmation. --JuTa 03:52, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Although it has on OTRS tag, the photographer has been identified as Namvar Abbasian here. Pinging the OTRS agent who accepted the permission statement: User:Nat. 4nn1l2 (talk) 14:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- @4nn1l2:
Info Based on the evidence presented here, OTRS' acceptance of the permission has been withdrawn and a query message has been sent. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 14:59, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 03:51, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Wikipediaのページの右側の表示されないため、削除してください。 Whitenatural (talk) 02:16, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:23, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
トリミング無で投稿してしまいました。 江戸村のとくぞう (talk) 08:07, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:23, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
The uploading editor claims that the university owns the copyright but there is different copyright information in the metadata. We need firm evidence of the copyright status of this image (and all other images uploaded by this editor). ElKevbo (talk) 22:07, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Missvain (talk) 17:23, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
Matlab is copyrighted shizhao (talk) 06:51, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Does it mean that all Category:MATLAB should be deleted? JackPotte (talk) 07:14, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Keep The fact that Matlab is copyrighted might affect some aspects of screenshots, where these show the protected design concepts of that software. However the graphical display of mathematical data is not Matlab's IP. The screenshot aspects visible here (and on the others in the cat that I've seen) are both de minimis and are anyway based on standard Windows design aspects, not on anything from Matlab. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:55, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:38, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Cropped? From what? 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 00:21, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
I emailed the woman this page is about for a photo, this is the direct file she gave me with an unedited file name. I did not crop it myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mochamedusae (talk • contribs) 00:28, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Keep Blocked anonymous vandal, that opens invalid deletion requests, was blocked a few days ago with IP 2A02:C7D:3C1A:7300:9CDC:793:5A8B:1702, but now is back under IP 2A04:4A43:4C7F:A7DC:A458:D936:1FAD:D4C2 opening dozens of deletion requests as vandalism, in some using sexually vulgar and demeaning sexist language and in others accusing Commons of having porn (in contradiction to each other). Also not valid reason to delete. Tm (talk) 01:30, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for nomination. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:47, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
The file was previously nominated and kept per Commons:Deletion requests/File:2016 Billie Swalla cropped.png. The image is from the University of Washington and used on the subject's bio. The image is marked as own work but the deletion discussion makes it clear that this is not the uploader's own work and was received via email from the subject who is also very unlikely to the copyright holder. COM:OTRS confirmation of license from the copyright holder would be needed, Whpq (talk) 23:06, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
I did not realize it was on that website. I will try uploading the image with the proper citations and removing this file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mochamedusae (talk • contribs) 03 May 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mochamedusae (talk • contribs) 13:41, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Mochamedusae: It isn't an issue of "proper citations", but rather of copyright and licensing. The information on the file as you uploaded it made the claim that you are the copyright holder and that you released it under a free license. That is not true. What needs to happen is the thge copyright holder needs to provide the permission. Note that the copyright holder is very unlikely to be the subject of the photo. Whpq (talk) 13:48, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:43, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Das Foto zeigt nicht die angegebene Person. Feldrich (talk) 09:50, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per self-nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:37, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
- File:Tomica Locomotive.jpg
- File:Strato Vector Edisi Filipina.jpg
- File:Tiger Zap Tamiya.jpg
- File:Savanna Leo Tamiya.jpg
- File:Mammoth Dump Truck Tamiya.jpg
- File:Special Panda Edition.jpg
- File:Kumamon Special Edition.jpg
- File:Shirokumakko Special Edition.jpg
- File:Tamiya Cross Tiger VR.jpg
G I Chandor (talk) 23:23, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:50, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Opie Kumis Havid.jpg
- File:Dicky Chandra.jpg
- File:Aditya Novika.jpg
- File:Widya Cat Lady.jpg
- File:Intan Erlita Novianti.jpg
- File:Ayrton Senna Pesawat RC Cropped.jpg
- File:Aécio Neves, Michael Schumacher e Didi (Cropped).jpg
- File:Michael Schumacher - Fernand Bachmann - Cropped.jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:44, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose for the Schumacher and Senna images. These files are derivative works from images in the public domain and respect the licenses. The correct information is displayed in the descriptions of the images. These should not have been nominated. Neutral on the other images, as I cannot genuinely make an assessment that these are not the uploader's own work. I must say that I find the nominator's arguments unconvincing. A small resolution does not automatically mean it's not their own work.Tvx1 (talk) 17:12, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination (FB in metadata), except as noted. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 15:44, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Copyright violoation. These files are not in line with the Copyright Act of the Netherlands:
- FOP is not applicable to these artworks because:
- They are not in a public place because there is an entrance fee required, see https://www.hortusharen.nl/en/practical-information/entry-fee-season-2020-2021/.
- The sculptures were put on display during temporary exhibitions, see Website Hortus Haren, so they are not permanently on this place, as is required for FOP in the Netherlands.
- As far as I can judge, all these artworks are contemporary art from Dutch artists, the artists cannot be dead for at least 70 years (they might even be all still alive), and therefor these artworks are not in the public domain.
- None of these files has an OTRS permission.
Comments
[edit]Als u al deze foto's wilt verwijderen, bent u verkeerde bezig. Wij zijn uren bezig geweest om deze foto's voor Wikimedia te maken. Veel van deze foto's hebben de Valued Image status. Deze foto's staan ook op diverse website's van de kunstenaars op het publieke domein. If you want to delete all these photos, you are wrong. We have spent hours making these photos for Wikimedia. Many of these photos have Valued Image status. These photos are also on various websites of the artists in the public domain.--Famberhorst (talk) 10:00, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- The question is not whether these pictures have a Valued Image status or have involved al lot of time, but whether they have been legally uploaded. An image of a sculpture in the Netherlands is only legally uploaded if:
- the sculpture meets the requirements of FOP, which is not the case; OR
- the artist is dead for at least 70 years, which is not the case; OR
- the artist (or his/her legal representative) has sent an email with his/her consent to OTRS, which is not the case.
- It is irrelevant that photos of these sculptures are on websites of the artists: the artists own the copyright of the sculptures, so they may do so. A photo on a website (any website) does not mean that the sculpture (or the photo) is in the public domain! Exception: if there is a clear, explicit statement from the artist on that website that the sculpture is in the public domain. If so, please mention this website in the file of the photo. JopkeB (talk) 13:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Dag JopkeB, Onbegrijpelijk en demotiverend dat u mijn zorgvuldig voor wikimedia genomen foto’s wilt verwijderen. Dan is alle tijd die we erin hebben gestoken voor niets geweest. Dat kan toch niet de bedoeling zijn? Wat is daar de reden van? De meeste kunstenaars van de beelden hebben zelf een wikipedia pagina (zie de linken hieronder). Gaat u de foto’s op die pagina’s ook verwijderen? Wij kunnen de kunstenaars eventueel via e-mail vragen om toestemming.(OTRS) We hebben wel vaker contact gehad als we niet zeker waren van de naam van het kunstwerk. Ook hebben sommige kunstenaars een wikimedia categorie (niet door ons aangemaakt!) Is er eventueel ook beroep mogelijk op uw voor ons ongunstige beslissing? Groeten van Agnes Monkelbaan.
Hello JopkeB, Incomprehensible and demotivating that you want to delete my photos carefully taken for wikimedia. Then all the time we have put into it will be in vain. That cannot be the intention, can it? What is the reason for that? Most of the artists of the images have their own wikipedia page (see the links below). Are you going to delete the photos on those pages too? We may ask the artists for permission via e-mail.(OTRS) We have been in contact before when we were unsure of the name of the artwork. Some artists also have a wikimedia category (not created by us!) Can you possibly also appeal against your unfavorable decision? Greetings from --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:29, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loek_Bos
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karianne_Krabbendam
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gjalt_Blaauw
- Hello Agnes Monkelbaan, I am NOT the judge about the actual deletion of these files, that will be a moderator (I am not a moderator). I just signal that these files might be violating copyrights of the artists. Answers to your questions:
- Whether an artist has a Wikipedia page and/or a WikimediaCommons category is not relevant. Yes, if the images will be deleted, then they will be removed from those Wikipedia pages as well.
- Yes, that is certainly a good idea, to ask permission via e-mail from the artists. I think this might be the only way to prevent deletion of the files. You'll find an example on OTRS/Toestemming foto vragen; you should adjust this text, because it is made for photos, not for sculptures.
- You can appeal via this discussion page. Mention your legal counter arguments here, the moderator will read them and weigh them up against mine.
- JopkeB (talk) 16:09, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Bedankt voor uw antwoord. Ik wil de artiesten toestemming vragen, maar als is “OTRS/Toestemming sculptures vragen” intoets blijkt dat niet te bestaan! Hoe nu verder. Is toestemming van de kunstenaar via mail voldoende?
- PS: als u het niet erg vindt Doe ik het in het Nederlands. Ik beheers de Engelse taal niet en dat geeft vaak aanleiding tot verwarring.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:58, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Agnes Monkelbaan: Bruikbare Nederlandse tekst voor een verzoek aan de kunstenaars staat hier. Dit kan allemaal in het Nederlands worden afgehandeld, er zijn ook Nederlandstalige vrijwilligers actief op OTRS. Voor zover er een verzoek om toestemming aan de betreffende kunstenaar is gedaan, is het nuttig om dat op deze pagina te melden. In afwachting van toestemming van de kunstenaar zijn moderatoren meestal wel bereid om de bestanden niet te verwijderen. Hoewel mijn ervaring met OTRS meer betrekking heeft op teksten dan op foto's en standbeelden, wil ik je waar nodig graag behulpzaam zijn: WikiWoordenboek (waar ik moderator ben) gebruikt "Zwanger" van Anita Franken, dus een beetje belanghebbend ben ik wel. --MarcoSwart (talk) 19:46, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Goedemorgen meneer Swart, Hartelijk dank voor u aanbod om te helpen dat onze foto's van de kunstobjecten niet verloren gaan. Even een vraag: Moet ik voor iedere foto apart toestemming vragen aan de beeldhouwer? Ik wacht uw antwoord af. Nogmaals dank. Alleen redden wij het niet.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:45, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- Nee, dat mag in één keer. Er kan per beeldhouwer één mail voor alle afbeeldingen gevraagd worden, mits in de mail alle links naar de betreffende foto's worden vermeld. JopkeB (talk) 04:54, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Affected files
[edit]- File:Hortus Haren (28311318724).jpg
- File:Hortus Haren (28313820433).jpg
- File:Hortus Haren (28644185380).jpg
- File:Hortus Haren (28853406481).jpg
- File:Hortus Haren (28853431241).jpg
- File:Hortus Haren (28853437281).jpg
- File:Hortus Haren (28929919195).jpg
File:Hortus Haren (actm) 01.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 12:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren (actm) 02.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 12:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren (actm) 03.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 12:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren (actm) 04.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 12:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)- File:Hortus Haren (actm) 05.jpg
File:Hortus Haren (actm) 06.jpgKept, a simple bench, below the threshold of originality. Natuur12 (talk) 22:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)- Keep This is not a work of art, but just one of the benches in the Hortus. --MarcoSwart (talk) 20:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- File:Hortus Haren (actm) 09.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren (actm) 10.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren (actm) 11.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren (actm) 12.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren (actm) 13.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren (actm) 14.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren (actm) 15.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren (actm) 16.jpg
File:Hortus Haren (actm) 18.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS.Natuur12 (talk) 14:55, 7 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren (actm) 19.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS.Natuur12 (talk) 14:55, 7 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren (actm) 20.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS.Natuur12 (talk) 14:55, 7 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren (actm) 21.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS.Natuur12 (talk) 14:55, 7 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren (actm) 22.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS.Natuur12 (talk) 14:55, 7 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren (actm) 23.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS.Natuur12 (talk) 14:55, 7 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren (actm) 24.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS.Natuur12 (talk) 14:55, 7 May 2021 (UTC)- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (actm.) 14.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (actm.) 15.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (actm.) 16.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (actm.) 17.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (actm.) 18.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (actm.) 19.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (actm.) 20.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (d.j.b).11.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (d.j.b).12.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (d.j.b).14.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (d.j.b).15.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (d.j.b).16.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (d.j.b).17.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (d.j.b).18.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (d.j.b).19.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren d.j.b 02.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren d.j.b 03.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren d.j.b 04.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren d.j.b 25.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren d.j.b 26.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren d.j.b 27.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren d.j.b 28.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren d.j.b.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren kunst object 01.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren kunst object 02.JPG
- File:Hortus Haren kunst object 03.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren kunst object 04.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren kunst object 05.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (actm.) 28.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (actm.) 29.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (actm.) 30.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (actm.) 31.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (actm.) 32.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (actm.) 33.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (actm.) 38.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (d.j.b.) 01.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (d.j.b.) 02.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (d.j.b.) 03.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (d.j.b.) 04.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (d.j.b.) 05.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (d.j.b.) 06.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (d.j.b.) 07.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (d.j.b.) 08.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (d.j.b.) 09.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (d.j.b.) 10.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (d.j.b.) 11.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. 06-05-2020 (d.j.b.) 12.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. Kunstobject 01.JPG
- File:Hortus Haren. Kunstobject 02.JPG
- File:Hortus Haren. Object in de Floriadetuin 01.JPG
- File:Hortus Haren. Object in de Floriadetuin 02.JPG
- File:Hortus Haren. Object in watertuin.JPG
- File:Hortus Haren. Windobject 01.JPG
- File:Hortus Haren. Windobject 02.JPG
- File:Hortus Haren. Windobject 03.JPG
File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 01.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 02.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 03.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 04.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 05.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 06.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 07.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 08.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 09.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 10.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 11.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 12.jpg
File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 13.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS Natuur12 (talk) 20:06, 7 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 14.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS Natuur12 (talk) 20:06, 7 May 2021 (UTC)- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 15.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 16.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 17.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 18.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 19.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 20.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 21.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 22.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 23.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 24.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 25.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 26.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 27.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 28.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 29.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 30.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 31.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 32.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 33.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 34.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 35.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 36.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 37.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 38.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 39.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 40.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 41.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 42.jpg
File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 43.jpgkept, OTRS permission received, and listed on file page Elly (talk) 20:11, 8 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 44.jpgkept, OTRS permission received, and listed on file page Elly (talk) 20:11, 8 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 45.jpgkept, OTRS permission received, and listed on file page Elly (talk) 20:11, 8 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 46.jpgKept, OTRS permission received. Natuur12 (talk) 13:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 47.jpgKept, OTRS permission received. Natuur12 (talk) 13:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 48.jpgKept, OTRS permission received. Natuur12 (talk) 13:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 49.jpgKept, OTRS permission received. Natuur12 (talk) 13:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 50.jpgKept, OTRS permission received. Natuur12 (talk) 13:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (actm.) 51.jpgKept, OTRS permission received. Natuur12 (talk) 13:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 01.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 02.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 03.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 04.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 05.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 06.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 07.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 08.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 09.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 10.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 11.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 12.jpg
File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 13.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS Natuur12 (talk) 20:06, 7 May 2021 (UTC)- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 14.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 15.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 16.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 17.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 18.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 19.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 20.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 21.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 22.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 23.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 24.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 25.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 26.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 27.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 28.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 29.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 30.jpg
- File:Hortus Haren. ‘10 jaar Kunst in de Hortus’, 09-10-2020 (d.j.b.) 31.jpg
- File:Mea Culpa. Kunstwerk van Koen de Vries. Locatie Hortus Haren.jpg
- File:Moonflower. Kunstwerk van Hans Rikken. Locatie Hortus Haren 01.jpg
- File:Moonflower. Kunstwerk van Hans Rikken. Locatie Hortus Haren 02.jpg
- File:Nomen Nescio. Kunstwerk van André Boone. Locatie Hortus Haren 01.jpg
- File:Nomen Nescio. Kunstwerk van André Boone. Locatie Hortus Haren 02.jpg
File:Organic Steel. Kunstwerk van Henk Slomp. Locatie Hortus Haren 02.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. --Daniuu (talk) 16:25, 12 May 2021 (UTC)File:Organic Steel. Kunstwerk van Henk Slomp. Locatie Hortus Haren.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. --Daniuu (talk) 16:25, 12 May 2021 (UTC)- File:Sun and Moon. Kunstwerk van Hans Rikken. Locatie Hortus Haren.jpg
- File:Takkenmanhortus1.JPG
- File:Te lang gelegen Hortus Haren (28824502502).jpg
File:Zaaddrager. Kunstwerk van Henk Slomp. Locatie Hortus Haren 02.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. --Daniuu (talk) 16:25, 12 May 2021 (UTC)File:Zaaddrager. Kunstwerk van Henk Slomp. Locatie Hortus Haren.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. --Daniuu (talk) 16:25, 12 May 2021 (UTC)- File:‘Kakatoes’. Kunstwerk van Hans Rikken. Locatie Hortus Haren.jpg
- File:‘Kiem’. Kunstwerk van Lucas Klein. Locatie Hortus Haren 01.jpg
- File:‘Kiem’. Kunstwerk van Lucas Klein. Locatie Hortus Haren 02.jpg
- File:‘Vera’. Kunstwerk van Joeri van Marrewijk. Locatie Hortus Haren 01.jpg
- File:‘Vera’. Kunstwerk van Joeri van Marrewijk. Locatie Hortus Haren 02.jpg
- File:‘Vera’. Kunstwerk van Joeri van Marrewijk. Locatie Hortus Haren 03.jpg
- File:‘Zalm van Lugh’. Kunstwerk van André Boone. Locatie Hortus Haren 01.jpg
- File:‘Zalm van Lugh’. Kunstwerk van André Boone. Locatie Hortus Haren 02.jpg
File:‘Zwanger’. Kunstwerk van Anita Franken. Locatie Hortus Haren 01.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)File:‘Zwanger’. Kunstwerk van Anita Franken. Locatie Hortus Haren 02.jpgKept, permission confirmed via OTRS. Natuur12 (talk) 21:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_01.jpg){kind=link}
_02.jpg){kind=link}
_03.jpg){kind=link}
_04.jpg){kind=link}
_05.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_06.jpg){kind=link}
_09.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_10.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_11.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_12.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_13.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_14.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_15.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_16.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_18.jpg){kind=link}
_19.jpg){kind=link}
_20.jpg){kind=link}
_21.jpg){kind=link}
_22.jpg){kind=link}
_23.jpg){kind=link}
_24.jpg){kind=link}
_14.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_15.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_16.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_17.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_18.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_19.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_20.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.11.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.12.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.14.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.15.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.16.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.17.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.18.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.19.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_28.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_29.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_30.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_31.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_32.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_33.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_38.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_01.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_02.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_03.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_04.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_05.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_06.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_07.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_08.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_09.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_10.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_11.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_12.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_01.jpg){kind=link}
_02.jpg){kind=link}
_03.jpg){kind=link}
_04.jpg){kind=link}
_05.jpg){kind=link}
_06.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_07.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_08.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_09.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_10.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_11.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_12.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_13.jpg){kind=link}
_14.jpg){kind=link}
_15.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_16.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_17.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_18.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_19.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_20.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_21.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_22.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_23.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_24.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_25.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_26.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_27.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_28.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_29.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_30.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_31.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_32.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_33.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_34.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_35.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_36.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_37.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_38.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_39.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_40.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_41.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_42.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_43.jpg){kind=link}
_44.jpg){kind=link}
_45.jpg){kind=link}
_46.jpg){kind=link}
_47.jpg){kind=link}
_48.jpg){kind=link}
_49.jpg){kind=link}
_50.jpg){kind=link}
_51.jpg){kind=link}
_01.jpg){kind=link}
_02.jpg){kind=link}
_03.jpg){kind=link}
_04.jpg){kind=link}
_05.jpg){kind=link}
_06.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_07.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_08.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_09.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_10.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_11.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_12.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_13.jpg){kind=link}
_14.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_15.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_16.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_17.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_18.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_19.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_20.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_21.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_22.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_23.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_24.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_25.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_26.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_27.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_28.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_29.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_30.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_31.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
JopkeB (talk) 08:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
More comments
[edit].jpg)
- Keep Article 18 of the Dutch copyright law does not require that the work is permanently on display at a particular location, but that it has been made to be permanently displayed in public spaces. According to Dutch jurisprudence (Rechtbank Leeuwarden, 19-04-2005, 69242 KG ZA 05-73) as long as works are visible from public space, freedom of panorama can be applied. So it is not correct to assume that copyright is being violated by these pictures. I support the suggestion above to ask the sculptors for an explicit permission by OTRS, just to be on the safe (and decent) side. --MarcoSwart (talk) 19:46, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- (1) The question is whether these sculptures have been made to be permanently displayed in public spaces, you cannot tell unless you ask the artist. (2) Still the problem remains that the Hortus Haren, where the photos were taken, is not a public place, it is not "een voor iedereen toegankelijke openbare plaats en ... voor iedereen zichtbaar" (a public place accessible to everyone and ... visible to everyone) as stated in the verdict. JopkeB (talk) 05:22, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
- (1) The legal criterion "made to be permanently displayed in public spaces" is factual, not a matter of opinion of the artist. It would make little legal sense to limit the rights of the authors on the basis of their personal view on the matter. (2) The interesting part of the verdict is that even a resort, only accessible for (paying) guests was considered to be a public place in the legal sense. The Hortus is quite similar in this respect. My impression is that the sculptors in this case are aware that photographs of their works are being used under a free license. But I do agree that to encourage future cooperation with artists, obtaining an explicit permission is the best way to go. --MarcoSwart (talk) 22:36, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Even alles op een rijtje (toch maar gedeeltelijk in het Nederlands, dat citeert gemakkelijker):
- Uit de Memorie van Toelichting (2002) [Het gaat om beperkingen op het auteursrecht, uitzonderingen die wel in het publieke domein zijn]: Het moet gaan om werken die bestemd zijn om blijvend op een specifieke daarvoor bestemde openbare plaats [cursief door mij, JopkeB], dat wil zeggen aan de openbare weg, in een openbaar park of in openbare gebouwen te worden geplaatst. ... Evenmin vallen werken die deel uitmaken van een slechts tijdelijke tentoonstelling op een stadsplein of andere openbare plaats onder de beperking [d.w.z. dat beelden in een tijdelijke tentoonstelling NIET in het publieke domein zijn, JopkeB].
- My conclusion: the Dutch copyright law does indeed require that the work is permanently on display at a particular location.
- The works (houses, not sculptures) in the jurisprudence (Rechtbank Leeuwarden, 19-04-2005, 69242 KG ZA 05-73) comply with this: they are permanently in the resort. The scultpures in the temporary exhibition in the Hortus are not.
- Another difference: Works must be visible from a public space, that is what the jurisprudence (Rechtbank Leeuwarden, 19-04-2005, 69242 KG ZA 05-73) is about. You stated that: "that even a resort, only accessible for (paying) guests was considered to be a public place in the legal sense." But that is not true, the houses are in the public place because they are visible from a public road, in spite of being on a resort, only accessible for (paying) guests. And that is not true for the sculptures in the Hortus; they are not visible from a public road, you can only view them when you are inside the Hortus, after having paid an entrance fee. And the photos were made inside the Hortus, not from a public road.
JopkeB (talk) 05:07, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
- You are of course entitled to your opinions. The literal text of the law you are quoting in fact only requires that the work is intended for permanent display at a (any) public location specifically destined to show (any) work. It is not uncommon for sculptures to be moved to a different location, the law clearly does not intend to prohibit publication in these cases.
- BTW, part of the pictures are of sculptures on permanent display in the Hortus.
- The important part of the verdict is the much wider definition of "public space": Dat de woningen - zoals De Groene Leguaan stelt - op een niet voor iedereen vrij toegankelijk vakantiepark staan, doet aan het voorgaande niet af. Het criterium "openbare plaats" heeft blijkens de wetsgeschiedenis een duidelijk ruimere strekking dan het voor de wetswijziging gehanteerde criterium "openbare weg". Niet alleen bouwwerken aan de openbare weg, maar op alle openbare plaatsen mogen dus zonder toestemming van de rechthebbende worden openbaar gemaakt en verveelvoudigd. (The houses being located on a holiday resort that is not freely accessible to everyone - like De Groene Leguaan posited - does not diminish the preceding [claim they are in a public space]. According to legal history, the criterion "public space" clearly has a wider meaning than the criterion "public road" used before the law was changed. [Pictures of] buildings, not just on public roads, but in all public spaces, can be published and reproduced without license.)
- "Public spaces" definitely can be locations that are only accessible after payment of a fee for a different purpose than getting to see works of art: train stations were an example mentioned by the Justice minister . A hortus can be considered a public park; the fee has nothing to do with the possibility to exploit art. --MarcoSwart (talk) 22:09, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
- There is a difference between train stations and the Hortus: anyone can enter a train station, at the time of the Kamerstuk, "stationshallen" were indeed fully open for the public, without paying a fee. But to enter the Hortus you have to pay a fee. And according to Kamerstuk 28482-8 is that an important difference: Voor de vraag of iets een openbare plaats is in de zin van artikel 18 Auteurswet is het in ieder geval van belang of het gaat om een plaats die krachtens bestemming of vast gebruik vrijelijk toegankelijk is voor het publiek. Daarbij kan onder meer een rol spelen of er voor de toegang entreegeld betaald moet worden... [bold by me, JopkeB]. So the fee is an important aspect to determinate whether a place is a public one. A public park can only be a public space if you can enter it without having to pay a fee. JopkeB (talk) 09:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
- The entrance fee can be relevant because "freedom of panorama" limits the possibilities to exploit the works exposed: paying for images of these works can be part of a business model that also includes entrance fees. Which explains why this just "plays a role" in determining whether a place is considered public and very clearly is not decisive by itself.
- Inmiddels ben ik uren bezig om de mailadressen van de kunstenaars te achterhalen. Soms via een contactformulier via hun websites. 3 kunstenaars zijn inmiddels overleden. Alle mensen die ik vroeg gaven het mailadres. Soms gaven ze direct via de mail toestemming. Maar als ze dan een zeer ingewikkelde procedure moeten doorlopen, hoor je niets meer. Het zijn kunstenaars geen juristen. Het systeem kan veel eenvoudiger. Een citaat uit een ontvangen mail: "Ik had u anders graag geholpen. En zeker om beelden op Wikimedia te zetten (ik hou van vrije toegang tot woord en beeld) en het is toch al zo’n gebemoei van alles en iedereen op Wikipedia.".
- Ik ben bang, dat ik uiteindelijk weinig respons terug ontvang en gaan veel kwaliteitsfoto's van ons verloren. Waar zijn ze bij Wikimedia bang voor? Komt er al een klacht, zijn de foto's in no time verwijderd.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:51, 2 May 2021 (UTC) PS: Hierboven staan ook foto's welke helemaal niet van ons zijn!
Beste Agnes,
- Welke procedure moet volgens u worden doorlopen en waarom is die ingewikkeld? Ik weet niet beter of de procedure is als volgt:
- U stuurt een mail naar de kunstenaar met de voorgestelde tekst en vraagt hem/haar of hij daarmee akkoord gaat; in de mail staan de links naar de foto's waar het om gaat en het e-mail-adres van OTRS.
- Als de kunstenaar akkoord is, stuurt hij/zij de mail door naar OTRS met zijn toestemming en een cc naar u.
- Volgens mij is dit alles. Ik heb het diverse keren voor foto's gedaan en ik heb geen klachten van fotografen gekregen dat het ingewikkeld was.
- Hoe kan de procedure volgens u worden vereenvoudigd?
- Voor overleden kunstenaars kunnen in principe de rechtsopvolgers (nabestaanden, erfgenamen) worden aangeschreven, maar vaak is het onbegonnen werk om die te achterhalen. Ik weet hier geen oplossing voor.
- Over uw laatste opmerking: Wikimedia wil zich aan de wet houden. Zie uitleg op: Voorzichtigheidsprincipe.
JopkeB (talk) 09:58, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
- De procedure en teksten zijn afgestemd op de makers van een foto, niet op de makers van een afgebeeld werk. Dit lijkt een beetje op het probleem bij portretrecht, waarvoor uiteindelijk wikiportret in het leven is geroepen.
- Voor veel fotografen is beeldrecht van groot belang voor hun inkomen en is het omgaan met dit soort vragen gesneden koek, bij beeldhouwers gaat het juist meestal om de vergoeding voor het beeld zelf, waardoor het beeldrecht en de omgang daarmee overkomt als vreemde juristerij.
- Misschien moeten we het voorzichtigheidsprincipe daarom ook in omgekeerde richting durven toe te passen: als voldoende aannemelijk is dat de maker van een werk blij is met een vrije licentie op een foto daarvan schieten we ons doel voorbij als we die foto gaan verwijderen omdat die maker niet precies door onze hoepels springt. Er is dan immers geen sprake van "aanzienlijke twijfel". Waarom zouden kwade trouw bij de fotograaf als uitgangspunt moeten nemen? --MarcoSwart (talk) 11:12, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
- Ik ben niet bevoegd om hier zomaar een omkering van het voorzichtigheidsprincipe toe te passen en ik voel er ook niets voor om dit voor te stellen (maakt weinig kans). Ik weet dat Commons streng is op auteursrechten en dat er regels voor gelden, waaronder het voorzichtigheidsprincipe. Mijn indruk is, dat het bij het schenden van auteursrechten in de regel niet gaat om kwade trouw maar om onbekendheid met de finesses van de Auteurswet. Als een beeldhouwer blij is met een foto op Commons, kan hij dat via een verklaring laten weten. Als zo'n verklaring er niet is, gaat Commons ervan uit dat de kunstenaar niet akkoord is. Het auteursrecht beschermt juist kunstenaars die zelf hun kunstwerken willen exploiteren die niet in publieke ruimtes staan, bijvoorbeeld via (ansicht- of luxe) kaarten, posters en boeken, en die zelf in de hand willen houden of hun beelden gebruikt worden in logo's. Een foto op Commons staat het toe dat willekeurige ondernemers daarmee aan de haal gaan. JopkeB (talk) 04:15, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- Als we echt niets weten over de opvattingen van een kunstenaar kan ik me voorstellen dat het voorzichtigheidsprincipe betekent dat we ervan uitgaan dat de toestemming ontbreekt. Maar wanneer de verklaring van een kunstenaar niet precies de vorm aanneemt die wij bedacht hadden, kunnen we een kunstenaar juist benadelen door afbeeldingen te verwijderen. Welk doel zou daarmee gediend zijn? --MarcoSwart (talk) 19:57, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- Daar ben ik het volkomen mee eens. Kunstenaars die niet bedreven zijn op de computer maken fouten omdat de procedure voor hen te ingewikkeld ik. Als je ze meerdere malen moet benaderen omdat ze een fout(je) hebben gemaakt, raken ze ontmoedigd en laten het afweten, terwijl ze in principe al toestemming hebben gegeven. (Denk aan het schriftelijke stemmen bij de laatste verkiezingen. Ik heb het begeleidend schrijven minstens 5 maal over moeten lezen, voordat ik de procedure doorhad)--Famberhorst (talk) 05:03, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- Als we echt niets weten over de opvattingen van een kunstenaar kan ik me voorstellen dat het voorzichtigheidsprincipe betekent dat we ervan uitgaan dat de toestemming ontbreekt. Maar wanneer de verklaring van een kunstenaar niet precies de vorm aanneemt die wij bedacht hadden, kunnen we een kunstenaar juist benadelen door afbeeldingen te verwijderen. Welk doel zou daarmee gediend zijn? --MarcoSwart (talk) 19:57, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
- Ik ben niet bevoegd om hier zomaar een omkering van het voorzichtigheidsprincipe toe te passen en ik voel er ook niets voor om dit voor te stellen (maakt weinig kans). Ik weet dat Commons streng is op auteursrechten en dat er regels voor gelden, waaronder het voorzichtigheidsprincipe. Mijn indruk is, dat het bij het schenden van auteursrechten in de regel niet gaat om kwade trouw maar om onbekendheid met de finesses van de Auteurswet. Als een beeldhouwer blij is met een foto op Commons, kan hij dat via een verklaring laten weten. Als zo'n verklaring er niet is, gaat Commons ervan uit dat de kunstenaar niet akkoord is. Het auteursrecht beschermt juist kunstenaars die zelf hun kunstwerken willen exploiteren die niet in publieke ruimtes staan, bijvoorbeeld via (ansicht- of luxe) kaarten, posters en boeken, en die zelf in de hand willen houden of hun beelden gebruikt worden in logo's. Een foto op Commons staat het toe dat willekeurige ondernemers daarmee aan de haal gaan. JopkeB (talk) 04:15, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Stuur de mail van de kunstenaar door/laat de mail opsturen naar OTRS, dan kan de moderator beoordelen of de eigen verklaring van de kunstenaar voldoende is. Op deze pagina, in deze discussie komen we echt geen stap verder door allerlei bedenkingen op te voeren tegen de huidige procedure en regels, daar is dit niet de plaats voor. JopkeB (talk) 13:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- Ticket:2021050410002192 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 06:00, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- Ticket:2021050410011502 has been received regarding to file(s) mentioned here. --Krdbot 22:00, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
- Het beeld (of een grotere versie daarvan), staat sinds 2015 op Westerdoksdijk nabij huisnummer 705, Amsterdam. Het staat langs de weg,Ceescamel (talk) 13:23, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- Deze opmerking betreft File:Hortus Haren. Windobject 01.JPG en File:Hortus Haren. Windobject 02.JPG, zie Category:Door wind bewogen beweging. Nu deze sculptuur (of een kopie ervan) kennelijk in de openbare ruimte is geplaatst, kan het verwijderverzoek voor deze twee files wellicht vervallen. JopkeB (talk) 16:05, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Some could be kept because permission was received from the author. Thanks for all your efforts. --Ellywa (talk) 18:08, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
- Toevoeging over de laatste opmerking, dat het sculptuur elders staat (of een kopie). Artikel 18 AW luidt: Als inbreuk op het auteursrecht op een werk als bedoeld in artikel 10, eerste lid, onder 6°, of op een werk, betrekkelijk tot de bouwkunde als bedoeld in artikel 10, eerste lid, onder 8°, dat is gemaakt om permanent in openbare plaatsen te worden geplaatst, wordt niet beschouwd de verveelvoudiging of openbaarmaking van afbeeldingen van het werk zoals het zich aldaar bevindt. Waar het betreft het overnemen in een compilatiewerk, mag van dezelfde maker niet meer worden overgenomen dan enkele van zijn werken. De bepaling "zoals het zich aldaar bevindt" betekent dat je het werk mag afbeelden zoals het in de omgeving te zien is. Het uitknippen en elders plaatsen is dus niet toegestaan. Dus ook niet een andere afbeelding van hetzelfde beeld vrijgeven zoals in de hortus. Ellywa (talk) 18:13, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
Photographie prise par Théo Bernard et non par la personne qui l'a mise en ligne. Il faudrait vérifier le consentement de T. Bernard via un ticket OTRS par exemple RSVartanian (talk) 14:39, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 04:47, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
According to the license tag: "The photographer is not known, and cannot be traced, and the work has been created before 1 January 1951" Per Wahlöö was born in 1926, therefore this image was hardly taken before 1951. And probably this is not Per Wahlöö, search his on the Google. Regasterios (talk) 14:05, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
- Regardless of whether it was actually of Per Wahlöö and created prior to 1951, it was published in the Svenskt konstnärslexikon - I would guess in the last volume, which was from 1967. And thus it is "non-artistic (journalistic, etc.) and has been created before 1 January 1971 ". DS (talk) 17:22, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
- Deleted. This is obviously not Per Wahlöö who had, let say, a very particular face. The uploader has chosen not to respond; low quality portrait photos of unidentified people are normally out of scope. Thuresson (talk) 05:00, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
FYI, no FOP for indoor artworks in Taiwan, and calligraphic words are copyrighted as beyond their TOO rules Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:07, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep こばた is very simple text.--Benzoyl (talk) 15:33, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Benzoyl: that matches "Calligraphy works, including:" part of COM:TOO Taiwan as it looks very likely to be written by writing brush(es), and since it's what you wanna include, DM even can't apply here (or you can edit description to say that you don't really wanna take a photo on that thing). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:44, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Kept: Just an interior, not a copyrighted work. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:55, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
errore caricamento Roberto Sgarbossa (talk) 13:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 10:59, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
problemi di copyright Amlivbono (talk) 10:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Kept: kept as a simple logo per Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Italy#Threshold_of_originality. --Rosenzweig τ 21:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}