Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Hristijan Kicho

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

Files uploaded by Hristijan Kicho (talk · contribs)

[edit]

I seriously doubt any of these uploads are the uploaders own work.

1989 (talk) 01:41, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 11:37, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Hristijan Kicho (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:29, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk Mail 13:50, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Hristijan Kicho (talk · contribs) 3

[edit]

Likely not own works: low-res web size, crop marks, and almost all have FB or transmission code in EXIF data. Unreliable uploader, see previous DR's.

P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:42, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Is 960 × 720 px "low-res web size"? In previous DRs the reasons were "serious doubt" and "could be found" (but were not?) elsewhere, +"inconsistent resolutions" (natural if the user crops them). Too little said in those DRs to draw any conclusions about the contributor or about these files. Looking at those previous files could say something, but as they are deleted, I cannot see use any such information. –LPfi (talk) 16:42, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, for pictures supposedly taken in 2020, 960x720 with a filesize of about 150 KB is certainly low-res! Most telling is the FB code in the EXIF data. If previously published on FB, it will need OTRS at a minimum. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 17:44, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If published on FB (or anywhere). Images uploaded to FB but not published (such as those viewing of which was restricted to family members) do not need OTRS. And not all nominated files have an FB code. Is also a night view of 1 620 × 1 080 (1.3 M) "low-res web size"? I'd like to have all files nominated fulfil the stated reason for nominating them, and I do not like referring to a previous DR where nothing much was said. –LPfi (talk) 08:51, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Unlikely to be own work, despite the size. Those without FBMD probably came from Insta or similar. PCP especially based on the uploader history. --Gbawden (talk) 06:54, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Hristijan_Kicho&oldid=592563176"