Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2010/05/22
 |
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}
.JPG){kind=link}
Seems to be Flickrwashing, only image from account (also same username as original uploader here) and see http://www.aupadeportivo.com/manuel_pablo-fotos_del_deportivo_de_la_coruna-igfpo-167073.htm . fetchcomms☛ 00:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Bad flickr washing. --Martin H. (talk) 00:21, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
According to w:Troy Dean Harris, this is a work of art by Troy Dean Harris, and is likely copyrighted. fetchcomms☛ 00:52, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Delete Speedy even. It's a clear copyright violation.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:15, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted. Painting by living artist; copyright belongs to artist, not uploader. Infrogmation (talk) 08:52, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Seem to be copy/scan from a printed paper Crochet.david (talk) 14:46, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. I've semi-protected the image after more than one libel edits by IPs. --Túrelio (talk) 17:36, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- Delete No proof of free license. -Nard the Bard 00:45, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Obvious scan. fetchcomms☛ 00:12, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per above; also note that very poor image quality. Infrogmation (talk) 09:02, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 12:46, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
uploader acknowledges this is a test image, out of scope, malo (talk) 03:00, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted no reason to discuss about a definite test-image abf «Cabale!» 12:47, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
family photo, unused, out of scope malo (talk) 03:08, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; orphan, no in scope usefulness evident. Infrogmation (talk) 08:54, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:30, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Flickr copyright violation: the flickr user who uploaded this photograph is highly likely not the author of this image. Thus, he is not allowed to publish it under a free Creative Commons licence High Contrast (talk) 10:08, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Bad flickr user, see Template:Flickrvionote. --Martin H. (talk) 22:28, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Galleries are not articles with only one image. The text should support the images, not the other way around. Question for all -- should this have been a speedy? --. . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 11:17, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
how do you see the images is supporting the text and not the text supporting the images?do update if more images needed for upload.will do so.thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.164.59.84 (talk • contribs) 11:00, May 22, 2010 (UTC)
Deleted as copyvio per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Felixia Yeap. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:46, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Copied from Panoramio (as stated by uploader), where it's copyrighted. http://www.panoramio.com/photo/14366869 Ednei amaral (talk) 14:43, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, copyright violation. Infrogmation (talk) 16:18, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
unused, useless, privacy violation, etc Frédéric (talk) 18:30, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:48, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Publication date unknown and the image was shot in Baku, Azerbaijan. This has no connection to the Ukraine at all, so the license is false. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:12, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Keep and change to {{PD-Azerbaijan}}, unknown author. -Nard the Bard 19:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Seems that this image does not have a proper license. The license used for this image claims that "image is in the public domain because its author died before 1949 or 50 years ago". However, the author of this image is not specified, so there is no evidence that author died before 1949 or 50 years ago. PANONIAN (talk) 19:56, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
- Keep --Cekli829 (talk) 05:37, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
- Keep--N KOziTalk 11:26, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
- KeepI find Pannonian will rewangschieren. That's audacity--MrArifnajafov (talk) 14:32, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Kept. - Jcb (talk) 18:07, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Well...I re-read the PD-AZ template and something must have changed to where this image is no longer PD in Azerbaijan until 2015. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:53, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
- Keep the 70 years pma was not retroactive on works that already fell into the public domain. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 23:35, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
- Is there something in the law that says it (so we can add it to the template)? User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:19, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- "3. Periods of validity of the protection, established by the present law, it is applied to all products which term of protection by the time of coming into force of the present law yet has not expired." Article 25[1]. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 05:41, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- Ok. If you can add it to the license template, I'll close the DR. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:41, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- Done! :) -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 05:52, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- Ok. If you can add it to the license template, I'll close the DR. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:41, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- "3. Periods of validity of the protection, established by the present law, it is applied to all products which term of protection by the time of coming into force of the present law yet has not expired." Article 25[1]. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 05:41, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- Is there something in the law that says it (so we can add it to the template)? User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 00:19, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
out of scope, stuffed animal worship malo (talk) 19:25, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted speedyed for beeing definetely out of scope (no doubt at all) abf «Cabale!» 20:30, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
test image, no cats, out of scope malo (talk) 20:04, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:29, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Copyrighted, unused, album cover. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 20:20, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:28, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Google thumb, probably copyright violation Ras67 (talk) 23:02, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:50, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Google thumb, probably copyright violation Ras67 (talk) 23:04, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:50, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Google thumb, probably copyright violation Ras67 (talk) 23:05, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:50, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Google thumb, probably copyright violation Ras67 (talk) 23:05, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:50, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- File:Michael Essien Florent Malouda.jpg
- File:DDPChelseaDoubleParade2010on2010-9.jpg
- File:DDPChelseaDoubleParade2010on2010-7.jpg
Appear to be taken from Daniel Davies Photography, who is most likely a different person from the uploader. Flickr account is possibly a Flickrwashing account. --Ytoyoda (talk) 21:34, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted by Mattbuck: Flickr washing
This seems like out of our project scope to me — Dferg (talk) 14:41, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete unused, out of scope. Amada44 (talk) 15:52, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per nom --by Màñü飆¹5 talk 01:18, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted by Drini: out of scope, created for and by user which was banned from eswikibooks
No EXIF, looks like promotional photo. I smell copyvio. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:28, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, same picture in facebook http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/photo.php?pid=1832764&id=29825689561--Motopark (talk) 02:58, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted by ABF: In category Other speedy deletions; no permission
Probable copyvio - article on en.wp (and also here) was, image has no exif, suspicious name, low res. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:47, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Comment there is a duplicate File:Uploadfy.jpg --Herzi Pinki (talk) 22:21, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
OK, original tagged was low res, other points still apply to larger version. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:23, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Martin H. (talk) 04:40, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
unused private image - out of scope Cholo Aleman (talk) 06:57, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Personal. Not illustrative. --Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:14, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 19:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
unused private image - out of scope (look at the description) Cholo Aleman (talk) 07:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Personal.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:16, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 20:10, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
unused strange religous diagram - - out of scope Cholo Aleman (talk) 07:19, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- -mattbuck (Talk) - I am going to expand this DR to the following images, which appear to be part of a series:
This is an (unfinished) DR of #7:
strange diagram - out of scope - several similar files from this user, first try if out of scope is consens Cholo Aleman (talk) 20:10, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. I'd also like to nominate the rest of the files uploaded by this user Special:Contributions/Bob_Charmbury -- malo (talk) 21:20, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
1 - all these files are out of scope, private religion Cholo Aleman (talk) 19:42, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete all, none of these are realistically useful for an educational or informative purpose. Nyttend (talk) 20:44, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete I'm for deleting all. Nothing against religion. It's a matter of understandability. Out of context, those diagrams are useless. Spirituality it's a serious thing: you cannot reduce to diagrams. --Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:18, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted by Mbdortmund: Per Commons:Deletion_requests/File:08_Someone_Feels_Inspired.jpg
- Delete - All unused, out of scope. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:37, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 20:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
unused private image - out of scope, description is a joke Cholo Aleman (talk) 07:23, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Infrogmation (talk) 08:56, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, clearly useless. Nyttend (talk) 20:43, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Bad picture. No purpose.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 20:13, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
unused small diagram - unusable, too small, only edit of this user Cholo Aleman (talk) 07:24, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Delete far to small to be useful. Amada44 (talk) 15:54, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, clearly useless. Nyttend (talk) 20:43, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Really useless.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 20:13, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
out of scope: Commons is not someone's private photo album High Contrast (talk) 08:20, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Private.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:19, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 20:13, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
unused, useless, just a joke Frédéric (talk) 16:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete vandalism -- malo (talk) 17:19, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, no way that this will be useful. Nyttend (talk) 20:48, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:35, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 20:14, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
self promotion of website hosting services, which no longer seem to exist, out of scope malo (talk) 17:16, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Also include File:Hugu3.jpg, File:Hugu4.jpg, File:Hugu5.jpg, File:Hugu6.jpg, and File:Hugu7.jpg for the same reasons. -- malo (talk) 17:18, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete all of them. Promotion/advetising. --Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:25, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Delete per nom Cholo Aleman (talk) 04:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 20:14, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
description indicates this is nothing more than a self promotional photo, out of scope malo (talk) 17:51, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Promotional.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:39, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 20:16, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
website promotion, out of scope, malo (talk) 17:54, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Promotional.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:39, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 20:16, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
picture of some girl, out of scope malo (talk) 18:48, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Comment Dunno yet. But in my opinion the picture is quite an artistic portrait.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 19:25, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
- I agree. image is not to bad. I can't really think it being very useful though!? Any ideas? Amada44 (talk) 12:01, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 20:17, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
publicity photo, out of scope, malo (talk) 03:20, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per nomination. abf «Cabale!» 11:21, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
unused private image - out of scope (not good enough to use it in other ways) Cholo Aleman (talk) 06:33, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per nom Infrogmation (talk) 08:56, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Personal. Unused.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:12, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
unused private image (like several other files of this user) - out of scope Cholo Aleman (talk) 06:46, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Amada44 (talk) 15:50, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Personal. Low quality.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:13, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
unused private image - out of scope Cholo Aleman (talk) 06:52, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; low-res orphan personal image. Infrogmation (talk) 09:29, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Personal.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:13, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
unused nearly private image - out of scope (or does anybody know these musicians?) Cholo Aleman (talk) 07:05, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Not illustrative, at least.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:15, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
unused image of a guitarist - not notable, not good enough to be used otherways Cholo Aleman (talk) 07:07, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Comment - additional: self promotion Cholo Aleman (talk) 07:08, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete So it seems to me.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:16, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:23, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
unused nearly private image - out of scope, missing context Cholo Aleman (talk) 14:21, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete All the pictures uploaded by the user appear to be for self promotion only.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:23, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
unused private image - out of scope (tentative: self portrait of uploader (yo means " I" ) Cholo Aleman (talk) 14:23, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Private. Self promotion. --Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:24, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
just a chart to compare currency conversions, unused, dated, out of scope malo (talk) 17:35, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Unusable.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:26, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
unused personal image, joke, out of scope malo (talk) 17:56, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, quite useless unless the Medusa really did have a sister. Nyttend (talk) 20:50, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per nomination abf «Cabale!» 11:25, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
just a kid making a funny face, uncategorized, unused, out of scope malo (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per nomination. abf «Cabale!» 11:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
group photo, out of scope, description claims it is "nothing" malo (talk) 18:34, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, we're not an image-hosting website. Nyttend (talk) 20:54, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Unfortunately, it's just a private picture. I say unfortunately because the pic it's a bonanza for whoever is interested on body language topics. Maybe because they are kids, perhaps because they are from a small village, but just look at the picture and it's easy to spot who is friend with whom, who is in love with whom. And many more things, for example, their attitude toward the future. But, apart of that, it's out of scope. And body language it's not a science or, scientifically, it's still controversial. Good picture anyway. --Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 19:55, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
out of scope girl eating cake malo (talk) 18:40, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Private.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:35, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion abf «Cabale!» 11:27, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
self promotion of tv series, out of scope malo (talk) 19:19, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, quite useless. Nyttend (talk) 20:58, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Self promotion.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 19:21, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:27, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
images exists only to disparage it's subject, out of scope malo (talk) 20:17, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, no context and no way that this could be useful. Nyttend (talk) 20:55, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:29, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Out of scope: useful only for the deleted en:wp article on Xethahim, which was an autobiography. Nyttend (talk) 20:41, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete The image per se doesn't illustrate anything.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 19:38, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:29, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
No didactic purpose. Imaginary coat of arms. Not used on any project. --BrightRaven (talk) 22:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete No scope.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 19:26, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:30, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
No didactic purpose. Imaginary flag. Not used on any project. --BrightRaven (talk) 22:15, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete No scope, also.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 19:27, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted per discussion. abf «Cabale!» 11:30, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
TV screenshot Smooth_O (talk) 14:26, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, although it's tagged with OTRS pending, the OTRS should have gone through by now, since it's been a month since it was tagged with OTRS pending. Without OTRS evidence, we need to consider it a copyvio. Nyttend (talk) 20:46, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 22:03, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
uncategorized, unused, not sure what it is suppose to be, out of scope malo (talk) 17:12, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, not going to be useful. Note that it's in use at en:wp, but the page is simply a list of images that includes many that have been deleted; it's not the sort of page that counts toward making this image in scope. Nyttend (talk) 20:49, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Unusable, this way.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:24, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 22:05, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
This photograph contains a secondary photograph within it, which is quite disruptive. --Mindmatrix 17:38, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- mmm, donuts. Keep in use, and picture inside picture is as such on source at flickr. -Nard the Bard 17:41, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep, the pip is distracting - yes, but it's still a descriptive image. SpacemanSpiff (talk) 19:57, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete It is what? Art? Photoshopping attempt? If the intention of the uploader was to document those cakes, there were better ways to do it. If not, as it appears to me, it's just crap.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 17:29, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 22:06, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Unused private photograph High Contrast (talk) 20:04, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete, pointless. Definitely not going to be useful. Nyttend (talk) 20:56, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted by ABF: per Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Porträt_EOS_7D_EF-S_17-55.JPG
No source or publication date. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:05, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep These bandurist images are old enough to be PD. en:Kuban_bandurists suggests these images are from the 1920's or 1930's at the latest. -Nard the Bard 23:08, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep per Nard. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:14, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Mbdortmund (talk) 22:48, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
File is replaced by newer Version Periscope simple.svg Chrischi (talk) 10:15, 22 May 2010 (UTC) --Chrischi (talk) 10:16, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom. Better SVG available. --Guandalug (talk) 09:12, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. –Juliancolton | Talk 12:14, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
File is replaced by newer Version Periskop linsen.svg Chrischi (talk) 10:31, 22 May 2010 (UTC) --Chrischi (talk) 10:33, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Better version available, no need to keep the old one. --Guandalug (talk) 09:13, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. –Juliancolton | Talk 12:14, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
File is replaced by newer Version Feldlinse.svg --Chrischi (talk) 10:35, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Replaced by far better (scaleable) version. --Guandalug (talk) 09:14, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. –Juliancolton | Talk 12:15, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Google thumb, probably copyright violation Ras67 (talk) 23:01, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted by Herbythyme: Copyright violation
This is tagged as PD, produced in ca. 1920 and anonymous, and all rationales look spurious. For details, see the en:Tristan Tzara article: "in one of Man Ray's photographs, [Tzara] is shown kneeling to kiss the hand of an androgynous Nancy Cunard" (original source: Maureen Moynagh, introduction to Nancy Cunard, Essays on Race and Empire, Broadview Press, Peterborough & Orchard Park, p.24). This is very probably a reference to this photograph, and as such a post-1920 work by Man Ray. This makes additional sense since it is common knowledge (and detailed in the article) that Cunard met Tzara in Paris, and that Tzara was a new arrival in Paris in 1920. Man Ray's works are not public domain. Dahn (talk) 15:44, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Comment not sure if this helps but this TinEye search shows the same photograph used on the cover of the book The Lives of the Muses: Nine Women & the Artists They Inspired. I used Amazon's look-inside feature but there were no more details. Also this flickr image has "Tristan Tzara and Nancy Cunard, Paris, 1924 By Man Ray". -84user (talk) 00:17, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Insufficient information to just assume, that this is PD-old. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 15:30, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Not PD in Russia, unclear why this would be considered a Ukrainian work. -Nard the Bard 23:21, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- The author of the poster died in 1946, so it falls outside the cutoff date for Template:PD-Russia-2008. Plus, if you follow Commons policy, this image will also not be public domain in the USA because it was not public domain in the source country since Jan 1, 1996. Delete User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:22, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, {{PD-Ukraine}} does not apply, not PD otherwise. Kameraad Pjotr 20:07, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
According to the source, http://www.marshals.su/Genar/genar1.html, 1943 was the date he was selected for general of the army, not when this photo was actually taken. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 23:18, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Most likely not PD in Russia. -Nard the Bard 23:19, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, not in the public domain in Russia, {{PD-Ukraine}} does not apply. Kameraad Pjotr 08:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
No assertion of when the image was published; we need to know this in order to determine the license. If it was taken when he became a marshal, that was in the 1960's and past this template's cut off date. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:23, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete No proof this is a Ukrainian image. -Nard the Bard 19:30, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Martin H. (talk) 03:24, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Taken 1952, the author didn't die before 1951. sугсго 16:06, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Martin H. (talk) 21:56, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
Taken 1956, too lat for PD-Ukraine. sугсго 16:08, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Per nom absolutely no source information. --Martin H. (talk) 21:53, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
No source and no date of publication. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 22:55, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete en:Chernihiv_Musical_Instrument_Factory dates this image from 1968. -Nard the Bard 23:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Has now been tagged as pd-ukraine, but that evidently doesn't apply. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:07, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- The image was tagged as such before I sent it to DR. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 06:47, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. No source. --Martin H. (talk) 21:30, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative work High Contrast (talk) 20:58, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
By your logic, this would mean that the Category:Election posters in the United Kingdom (with 24 pics) and the Category:Election posters by country (with 15 countries) would also have to be deleted. If you delete my entries you have to delete all of these categories too. I don't think so. Ardfern (talk) 21:04, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
- Not my logic: read this and the fact that some images are not eligible for copyright. --High Contrast (talk) 06:44, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. This poster is clearly complex enough to be copyrighted. The only posters we can accept on Commons are under a free licence, because they are either (a) too old to be copyrighted, (b) too simple to be copyrighted or (c) have been released under a free licence by the author of the poster. Pruneautalk 14:00, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Out of scope. Wikipedia is not a place to give one person >7 minutes for his personal statement. So its not usefull for educational purposes to illustrate the topic. I removed the video from the en.wp article for exactly this reason. Martin H. (talk) 06:07, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. Within scope. Educational, historical, encyclopedic value as part of phenomenon w:Everybody Draw Mohammed Day. It is also a bit of a conflict of interest to go and remove a file from another project, and simultaneously attempt to get it removed here, as well. -- Cirt (talk) 06:10, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
On hold per en:Talk:Everybody Draw Mohammed Day (stable) we think, removal of partial removal of the sound can fix the WP:NPOV/WP:RS problem that I think exists and will make the file arguably useful. Waiting for edited version. --Martin H. (talk) 06:59, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Done, derivative work of the original file created. Audio track removed. Original work should be retained for licensing purposes and chain of modifications. Derivative work now at File:Draw Muhammad Day video by AwesomeSauceUK audio removed.ogv. -- Cirt (talk) 07:05, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Question Why not overwriting the existing file? --Martin H. (talk) 07:16, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- On Commons, modifications to existing files are typically uploaded as new files, so as to preserve the chain of changes. -- Cirt (talk) 07:17, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- However, if you feel there is no problem overwriting the existing file, I would have no objections to doing that. -- Cirt (talk) 07:18, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- On Commons, modifications to existing files are typically uploaded as new files, so as to preserve the chain of changes. -- Cirt (talk) 07:17, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Related deletion review at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#File:Mohammed by meco.png although the arguments seem rather different. __meco (talk) 07:35, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- That discussion indeed seems to be focused on that particular image. -- Cirt (talk) 07:37, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. Per Cirt. I'm undecided on whether the sound part should disqualify this video, meaning that I definitely support retaining the version without sound. __meco (talk) 07:38, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you, and just to note clarification once more, this current version now is the version without sound. There is currently no version with the sound. -- Cirt (talk) 07:40, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Comment One can still here the version with the sound track, where it says: "This is about not being frightened into silence." Without the sound, the censorship is blatant. (There is no copyright issue with music or something like that.) /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 08:51, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you, and just to note clarification once more, this current version now is the version without sound. There is currently no version with the sound. -- Cirt (talk) 07:40, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- I agree, and I cannot free myself from the notion that we're all here basically placating or humoring one editor's idiosyncratic whim. __meco (talk) 09:18, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- I am not placating. I feel uneasiness about personal soapboxing videos on Commons. It would probably be best to delete them all as out of scope. As I have said before. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 09:43, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with that sentiment, in general. The only problem here is that Everybody Draw Mohammed Day is in itself a soapbox foundation where people are encouraged to step onto it and voice their opposition to censorship and threats of violence by making drawings of Prophet Mohammed. That one video of a contributor making their drawing happened to have sound (which is not unusual for a video) in which these sentiments are resounded verbally is really very incidental and I don't think it warrants the sort of zealous attention it gets here, at all. __meco (talk) 10:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Anyway, I will revert to the version with sound. If that one is out of scope, the censored version is even more out of scope. As well as a bit of a disgrace. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 10:51, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, no worries. Best to retain and keep the audio version as a separate file, to preserve editing chain, much the same as with image restorations. File:Draw Muhammad Day video by AwesomeSauceUK audio removed.ogv. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 13:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Anyway, I will revert to the version with sound. If that one is out of scope, the censored version is even more out of scope. As well as a bit of a disgrace. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 10:51, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- I agree with that sentiment, in general. The only problem here is that Everybody Draw Mohammed Day is in itself a soapbox foundation where people are encouraged to step onto it and voice their opposition to censorship and threats of violence by making drawings of Prophet Mohammed. That one video of a contributor making their drawing happened to have sound (which is not unusual for a video) in which these sentiments are resounded verbally is really very incidental and I don't think it warrants the sort of zealous attention it gets here, at all. __meco (talk) 10:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. Without censorship. Most of the soundtrack regards how the drawing is made, nor should the artist be faulted for explaining his rationale. He may not be a great artist but certainly his presentation is educational, both as artwork and as anthropology. Wnt (talk) 18:06, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Comment I not withdraw my deletion request as long as the personal opinion starting after 3:39 isnt removed. Wikipedia cant include that persons personal opinion, that would be a violation of all quality standards: Unsourced, POV, original research too. No matter how many people share the opinion. Im unable to edit this video format, I tried it 2 hours this morning with downloading from youtube, testing various formats... Im simply not able, but I would cut it at 3:39, fade it out and show the result image in the end. This is nothing about "censorship", it is about quality. This is also not about interference of Wikipedia editorial choice, the video was uploaded by Cirt and added to all Wikipedia article versions by noone else but Cirt, so there is no editorial selection, its a Commons user who pushes that video to Wikipedia - a video that contains, as said, e.g. original research and that shouldnt be uploaded here in the first place. Im concerned how carelessly people (1) offer original research content on Commons (2) include 16 MB of media into Wikipedia without following the general quality standards of our projects. --Martin H. (talk) 21:28, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete That is how Cirt protects his uploads of soapbox video from YouTube, Xenu TV, etcetera. Or by obtaining OTRS tickets. Not what Commons should be used for. Delete this kind of video as out of scope. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:48, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete a guy who by participating in that "event" can become famous. Since when wikipedia is a platform for this? 95.59.83.215 18:56, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep I'm not convinced this is beyond project scope, it clearly relates to a notable topic and so I can see it could have an educational value. Whether or not it can or should be used on Wikipedia is not a deciding factor as to whether it should exist here so NPOV and original research etc. concerns are irrelevant. Derivative works can be created as appropriate which could make it more appropriate to use on Wikipedia and Commons does not exist just to host media files for Wikipedia or the other WMF projects. The audio should be kept but I'm happy for derivatives with it removed to exist. Adambro (talk) 17:20, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Soapboxing. Fine for youtube, out of scope here. --JN466 19:04, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Laaangweilig. Bad quality. --Mbdortmund (talk) 21:57, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Keepwithin scope as an example of not just a drawing done that day, as the other images are, but of someone engaged in the process of drawing one. Showing process is a good use of video; but now that the sound has been removed, an edited version would be of higher quality --edited to remove at least the close-ups of the artist, but not truncated because the process of drawing continued through at least the first 6 minutes. DGG (talk) 23:26, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
- Delete It doesn't say anything about the Draw Mohammed Day event, and it's not an artist, drawing or video that has been noted in sources. Not usable as a neutral example of how to draw because it's drawing a controversial character that is controversial to draw. It's also a bad example because of the artist stating his personal opinions in the video. Imagine showing this in a school classroom to show "how to draw". There is now a sound-less version here, which removes some problems, but, of course, then you lose the value of the commentaries about how he is drawing. If the artist wants to contribute a video about "how to draw" then he should make a neutral drawing with no out-of-topic commentaries. If he wants to show his opinions on Muhammed then Commons is not the place. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Sure, POV-pushing is here. And is w:WP:UNDUE, it's not a collection of internet-images or videos regarding this event. There's already enough graphic material in the gallery to illustrate the point. 95.59.86.157 17:41, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, out of project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 19:28, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
unused childrens drawing (???!) - out of scope Cholo Aleman (talk) 14:06, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Appears to be a self-made drawing by a semi-notable poet who edited his own article on Wikipedia for awhile. cf. [3] and [4] the second where he explicitly declares that *he* is Frederick Kesner. The image is definitely in scope. If it is found that the licensing is correct it should be re-added to the Wikipedia article. -Nard the Bard 17:50, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Comment if there is a use, it should be kept. Thanks for this research. Cholo Aleman (talk) 05:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Kept, seems to be in project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 20:01, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
No permission, no date of publication so we cannot determine the PD claim on it. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:20, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Given the last name and type of instrument, likely to be an actual Ukrainian image. I can find no record of H Dovzhenko for exact date of death however. -Nard the Bard 19:29, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- The photo was from a 1961 book, according to the uploader. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 18:12, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no date of first publication. Kameraad Pjotr 19:17, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Flickr uploader is not the author of this photo (User_talk:SorenShaman). -Nard the Bard 19:04, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep No evidence is provided that SorenShaman is the same as "Julien from Corbeil-Essonnes, France", and you can't accidentally make them Creative Commons: all images on Flickr are automatically marked as all-rights-reserved, so it's impossible to have them CC-licensed if you don't want to. Moreover, why would the same person accidentally upload several similar pictures to Flickr without meaning so to do? I don't see any good reason to take SorenShaman's statements as grounds for deletion. Nyttend (talk) 20:54, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, image is deleted on Flickr, but all other images of this user have the "non-commercial"-clause, which makes them unsuitable for commons. Kameraad Pjotr 18:02, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
File is replaced by newer Version Feldlinse.svg --Chrischi (talk) 10:38, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Question to the administrators: is it possible for your to delete my old account "Christian Schirm"? I can't access it any more an have a new account. After deleting these drawings, the account will be complete empty. -- Chrischi (talk) 10:45, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Uploader request; replaced by File:Feldlinse.svg. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 20:50, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Per Nom. Better version of the same image available. --Guandalug (talk) 09:19, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
- @Chrischi: Sorry, but there's no way to delete a user account. See de:Hilfe:Benutzerkonto_stilllegen for an explanation (I highly assume the same goes for Commons, as the user management is linked by now, but I must admit I don't know a help page here that mentions it). --Guandalug (talk) 09:19, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Close old open deletion request as Kept. Reason: Image is in use, free licensed, and svg image mentioned is not identical. -- Infrogmation (talk) 20:24, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Poorly sourced (sourced only to "Arizona Historical Sociaty", I guess maybe meaning either http://www.arizonahistoricalsociety.org/ or http://photos.lib.az.us/ ; I haven't found this image at either site but maybe someone else can, though note that both sites have copyright notices). Very dubious date claim (automobiles of this style didn't exist in 1900), questionable license (can't be "PD-old" without info on authorship; might be PD-US but we don't have enough info to confirm that either). --Infrogmation (talk) 08:33, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Relisting deletion request open since May, to see if any other discussion. Infrogmation (talk) 20:20, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:23, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Flickr uploader is not the author of this photo (User_talk:SorenShaman). -Nard the Bard 19:06, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep No evidence is provided that SorenShaman is the same as "Julien from Corbeil-Essonnes, France", and you can't accidentally make them Creative Commons: all images on Flickr are automatically marked as all-rights-reserved, so it's impossible to have them CC-licensed if you don't want to. Moreover, why would the same person accidentally upload several similar pictures to Flickr without meaning so to do? I don't see any good reason to take SorenShaman's statements as grounds for deletion. Nyttend (talk) 20:54, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, possible Flickrwashing. Kameraad Pjotr 18:43, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Flickr uploader is not the author of this photo (User_talk:SorenShaman). -Nard the Bard 19:06, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep No evidence is provided that SorenShaman is the same as "Julien from Corbeil-Essonnes, France", and you can't accidentally make them Creative Commons: all images on Flickr are automatically marked as all-rights-reserved, so it's impossible to have them CC-licensed if you don't want to. Moreover, why would the same person accidentally upload several similar pictures to Flickr without meaning so to do? I don't see any good reason to take SorenShaman's statements as grounds for deletion. Nyttend (talk) 20:54, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, possible Flickrwashing. Kameraad Pjotr 18:45, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Flickr uploader is not the author of this photo (User_talk:SorenShaman). -Nard the Bard 19:07, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep No evidence is provided that SorenShaman is the same as "Julien from Corbeil-Essonnes, France", and you can't accidentally make them Creative Commons: all images on Flickr are automatically marked as all-rights-reserved, so it's impossible to have them CC-licensed if you don't want to. Moreover, why would the same person accidentally upload several similar pictures to Flickr without meaning so to do? I don't see any good reason to take SorenShaman's statements as grounds for deletion. Nyttend (talk) 20:54, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
- Comment But we also see small size here and with File:Chabal en pleurs.jpg we have a press photo and blatant copyright violation from the same flickr user (see here #3, klick 'next' above the photo). Im unsure why not believe this. --Martin H. (talk) 21:07, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, likely Flickrwashing. Kameraad Pjotr 20:48, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
File:北の子(旭西橋).jpg etc.
edit.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
- File:北の子(旭西橋).jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:風の記憶(旭西橋).jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
.jpg&diff=0){kind=link}
.jpg&action=history){kind=link}
.jpg&action=watch){kind=link}
.jpg&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=purge){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.jpg&action=delete){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
.jpg&diff=0){kind=link}
.jpg&action=history){kind=link}
.jpg&action=watch){kind=link}
.jpg&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=purge){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.jpg&action=delete){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Copyright violation of art.
- Artist:ja:板津邦夫 (Itazu Kunio,1931-)
- Place:Japan
- Note:Freedom_of_panorama#Japan--KENPEI (talk) 11:58, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in Japan for artworks. Kameraad Pjotr 20:53, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
- File:小川に魚が帰った日（北海道療育園彫刻の森）.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
- File:月に飛ぶ(忠別橋).jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
.jpg&action=edit){kind=link}
.jpg&diff=0){kind=link}
.jpg&action=history){kind=link}
.jpg&action=watch){kind=link}
.jpg&action=unwatch){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=purge){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&preload=Commons:Deletion_requests/preload){kind=link}
.jpg&action=delete){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Copyright violation of art.
- Artist:ja:加藤昭男 (Kato Akio,1927-)
- Place:Japan
- Note:Freedom_of_panorama#Japan--KENPEI (talk) 12:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in Japan for artworks. Kameraad Pjotr 20:47, 30 October 2010 (UTC)