Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2010/07/15
 |
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}
Image is in millions of colors while it only has 32 unique colors. Image is in jpeg2000 format which is unsupported in most browsers. Re-uploaded as File:Ubiquinol molecule.png. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 23:48, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Actually I have no idea what was wrong with it. png is a superior format anyway. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 01:16, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Delete oh thank you. Several users were spending quite a bit of time trying to figure out why this didn't load in Internet Explorer earlier today on IRC. fetchcomms☛ 00:35, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Leyo 16:06, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
problems with flickr uploadbot (same image already uploaded here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2010eko_Aramaioko_jaiak.png) --Unai Fdz. de Betoño (talk) 13:05, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Common Good (talk) 19:13, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
unused duplicate of File:Beijing-2008-Olympic-Games.png --Perhelion (talk) 14:55, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- I wanted to tag as Duplicate. Is this text only file Commons:Scope? --Perhelion (talk) 15:08, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio: Exact or scaled down duplicate: File:Beijing-2008-Olympic-Games.png
Private image. Uploaded in January and, apparently, never used. Not in use now. Doubtfully the subject of the picture is also the author of it as declared. Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 03:07, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 11:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Personal, private picture. The sole contribution of the uploader. Not in use. Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 03:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 11:32, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Private image. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 03:52, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. –BruTe Talk 07:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 11:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Another private image of some Spanish teens. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 03:54, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 11:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Private image. Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 04:04, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 11:34, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Personal pic. A souvenir, perhaps. Not in use. Out of scope? Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 04:05, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete certainly out of scope. Who is this person? No notability or use potential. --Leoboudv (talk) 05:14, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 11:34, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
There is no evidence this drawing has a cc license. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 04:25, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Images from the Armenian Soviet Encyclopedia, Volume 7, 1981 Yerevan would be fair use and copyrighted whereas images on wikicommons here are all copyright free. Free for any purpose including for profit. --Leoboudv (talk) 05:16, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 11:35, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Unused private image, out of scope. –BruTe Talk 07:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 11:35, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Unused private image, out of scope. –BruTe Talk 07:43, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 11:35, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
reduced resolution duplicate of File:Chloromethyl Group General Formulae V.1.png —Preceding unsigned comment added by LobStoR (talk • contribs) (UTC)
- But V.1 does not display. --Leyo 18:28, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- 1. Thus, File:Chloromethyl Group General Formulae V.1.png should be deleted instead. Best regards, --Jue (talk) 19:44, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
This duplicate that doesn't display properly, File:Chloromethyl Group General Formulae V.1.png has been deleted. File:Chloromethyl Group General Formulae V.2.png is kept. Edgar181 (talk) 14:10, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
unused private image - out of scope Cholo Aleman (talk) 17:32, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 11:36, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
unused private image - out of scope Cholo Aleman (talk) 17:36, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 11:37, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
A photo of the same statue now exists with 5x better resolution: File:IAM 436T - Statuette of Athena.jpg Sandstein (talk) 09:48, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- my photo is with face in front view, and yours with face a little bit in 3/4. Not the same picture.Shakko (talk) 17:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Keep Having a different photo from the same subject is not a reason to delete. --PaterMcFly (talk) 20:45, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Kept. It may have 5x resolution, but it is not sharper and is from a different angle. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:47, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
I doubt it was drawn by the uploder. Same as http://factoidz.com/images/user/18260.jpg Jarekt (talk) 00:10, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:48, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Looks like a scan of printed material, and therefore not PD 83.163.5.82 05:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:50, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
no freedom of panorama in Belarus Wizardist (talk) 06:58, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:50, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Belarus Wizardist (talk) 07:03, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:51, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Identical copy of File:View of Preševo.JPG --Tadija (talk) 11:47, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Deleted File:View of Preševo.JPG and kept this one, which is higher resolution. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:56, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Unused private image, out of scope. –BruTe Talk 07:40, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:58, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Unused private image, out of scope. –BruTe Talk 07:44, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:58, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
missing grant of the licence.AP 10 (talk) 07:45, 15 July 2010 (UTC) --AP 10 (talk) 07:49, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Identical copy of File:Mosque in Preševo, Serbia.jpg --Tadija (talk) 11:37, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Album cover. I doubt the uploader has the authority to release it to us, and, if he does, we're going to need OTRS permission. J Milburn (talk) 12:07, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
COM:DW. sугсго 14:05, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Both political parties have been paid with 5 Deutschmarks/2.50 Euros for every voter - so it's common property of the people of Germany 78.55.16.63 21:44, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Nope. Political parties get money from the German state for their election campaigns, but that does not influence the copyrights of the creators of election posters. --Kam Solusar (talk) 23:31, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Work is permanent for its expected lifetime, which is until election day. Works are considered permanent for the purposes of FOP even if they have an extremely short lifetime. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 00:15, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- Advertising posters are only bleibend (permanent) if they are used not only temporary. This is a advertising poster for the 2010 NRW election. It is only allowed to use advertising posters for 6-10 weeks prior to the ecletion in NRW (depends on the municipality). See de:Panoramafreiheit or Urteil des OGH vom 31. Mai 1988 4 Ob 23/88) sугсго 07:31, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- Not permanently placed as this is not a work on its own, but rather a depiction of a work. The rule you cite is for works which remain in public until they are destroyed, e.g. sand sculptures or ice sculptures. There is no way to recreate those works once they are destroyed. This, however, is simply a poster and can be printed again after it has been removed from this location. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 11:23, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- Seems to me that there is no breach of legal rules, as the image doesn't depict one poster only. This is more like a random view of a street where two posters can be found by chance. The photographer didn't mean to depict one special poster. Thus the file may be judged under the freedom of panorama rules.--TUBS
09:34, 16 July 2010 (UTC) - Both posters are the main objects of this work. How shuold they be de minimis? sугсго 10:38, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- TUBS, you are mixing two arguments and none of them is valid. a) This is not de minimis as the posters are definitely the main subject of this image. Simply reading the first sentence of COM:DM (De minimis copying is copying of such a trivial nature that it can be ignored.) shows you that this does not apply here: The election posters are a main part of the image and are depicted in high resolution. b) This is not subject to FOP. The posters are put there with the intent to be removed by election day, thus not permanently installed. By the way, FOP is in no way related to DM, so I don't understand why you think that FOP applies when the posters are DM. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 11:23, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- Seems to me that there is no breach of legal rules, as the image doesn't depict one poster only. This is more like a random view of a street where two posters can be found by chance. The photographer didn't mean to depict one special poster. Thus the file may be judged under the freedom of panorama rules.--TUBS
- Delete, posters are main subject of the image, thus not DM. FOP does not apply as these are not permanently installed. This has already been ruled be the Austrian OGH (Austria's FOP rules are very similar to those in Germany), see OGH 4 Ob 23/88. Regards, -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 11:28, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- I was trying to play devil's advocate...little did I know actual case law existed. Delete of course. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 20:26, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:04, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Questionable own work. Also, not sure if this is a joke or not, but free to use "for Peace & Love issues" conflicts with free for any use including commercial and derivatives. Wknight94 talk 14:06, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:05, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
and File:Eurogeocentre.jpg. No Commons:Freedom of panorama in Belarus. Modern monument. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:00, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:07, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
unused photo of musical band with no notability, related article en:Divine Addiction was deleted from en wiki for that reason Santosga (talk) 16:06, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:07, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Not used Huhbakker (talk) 17:01, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:10, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation --Savh, Any questions? 17:39, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:10, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
unused image of an unknown band - selfpromotion - out of scope Cholo Aleman (talk) 17:59, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:10, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Unlikely own work, originally uploaded with a filename indicative of being ripped of a browser cache. No tineye hits. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 20:57, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment The original upload name was File:Y1ps zg5J4DODfaWbXQn3sYLFnvgOoI5ghlM6lUQspIjWQBDq3Bphs2MJroXaroKSok6OkYEQ5jAEEHAizdAgL0Wg.jpeg. –Krinkletalk 21:08, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:11, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Polish FOP states that it is allowed to propagate works that are permanently exhibited on the publicly accessible roads, streets, squares or gardens provided that the propagation is not for the same use. In the case of this map, the picture has the same use as the map itself, hence it isn't covered by the FOP exception. –Tryphon☂ 23:00, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- The same purpose - a plan with no signs of the pictures. The photograph is still an area which is not a plan and you will see that this is a photo. According to this reasoning Tryphon in Poland could not be anything to photograph. Example:
- The same purpose would have been if I had the advantage of this plan to the information reaching into my shop in the hospital.
- Photographed on a billboard advertising and use it as an advertisement of another product
To summarize, you can shoot all the objects placed permanently in public places, in the open unless they are clearly marked "non-shooting." - Ala z talk 10:00, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Kept. I read the law (in English, the Polish may have subtle differences) to say that if this were a painting, for example, I couldn't photograph it as FOP and then sell copies of it. But that's a long stretch here -- no one is going to sell copies of this sign as art. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:17, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
identical to File: K signal flag (Kilo).png, except that this is a copyrighted version whereas the other version is pd. --Grutness (talk) 23:02, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:26, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
The source isnt sufficient. Thats an reproduction from a poster, old photography printed today on posters is very unlikely of unknown authorship. At least it should be required to know, who printed the poster and what does the printer know about the photo. Just judging it anonymous by an ebay selling isnt enough. Martin H. (talk) 03:15, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. —Quibik (talk) 11:15, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Comment wouldn't being printed in 1910 as a postcard/poster be "published" therefore PD under {{PD-US}}? Author wouldn't be needed if it was published before 1923. — raeky (talk | edits) 23:21, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
- What is written on the backside of the original postcard? --Martin H. (talk) 10:52, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no country of first publication: if it was in the US, it is in the public domain ({{PD-1923}}; in the EU, the death date of the author is required. Kameraad Pjotr 11:41, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- Note: Restored, photo by JA Paris, a Parisian photography studio, so PD-old applies.-- Darwin Ahoy! 15:19, 19 September 2012 (UTC)This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Map based on non-free sources (ONE provides content for non-commercial use only). –Tryphon☂ 14:14, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Keep Only names of distritos & municipios have been verified on this site for control. No copy of any kind. It is just a source of verification. Also see JCE. Starus (talk) 04:13, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Kept, AGF on uploaders behalf. Kameraad Pjotr 19:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Probably copyvio --Havang(nl) (talk) 16:13, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
-2010-07-15T16:13:00.000Z-File:Heiliger-nikolaus.jpg){kind=link}
- Comment: uploader claims the original about 350. That is at the time the Saint was supposed to live; but it looks like a recent photograph and it is copyed from a site.
Deleted, likely copyright violation. Kameraad Pjotr 20:35, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
It is inappropriate to use {{PD-Polishsymbol}} for a map. Pieter Kuiper (talk) 07:15, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, {{PD-Polishsymbol}} does not apply. Kameraad Pjotr 19:28, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
The image do not fits the license tag requirements -- it wasn't taken from the Agencia Brasil website. Trycatch (talk) 23:55, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, bogus licensing. Kameraad Pjotr 18:48, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Nice pic. But pretty out of scope. Not really illustrative even of the country or the period when it was shot. Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 03:46, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Funny. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 04:29, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Keep per above and is categorized. :-) –BruTe Talk 07:33, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment Now I see it under a different light. Thanks, guys. Learning is a neverending process.--Giorgiomonteforti (talk) 00:24, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Kept, seems to be within [[COM:PS|project scope due to categorisation. Kameraad Pjotr 17:39, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This is NOT Thom Karremans, but someone else who happens to have a moustache, too. Erik1980 (talk) 09:30, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Request withdrawn after renaming, thanks to Kwiki for that. Erik1980 (talk) 10:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
- Look at http://www.google.com/images?client=opera&rls=de&q=Thom_Karremans&oe=utf-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&hl=de&tab=wi - This is Thom_Karremans. --87.189.94.159 13:52, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. The "real" Thom Karremans (see for example: [1]) has a much narrower face than the person shown in the picture. --VanBuren (talk) 18:00, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- Is it possible to rename it to something like "unknown soldier.jpg"? Kwiki (talk) 23:51, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Renamed. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:59, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
there was no Wall in Kreuzberg, because Kreuzberg was part of the American Sector --MB-one (talk) 21:11, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Question: what of Category:Berlin Wall in Berlin-Neukölln? -- Asclepias (talk) 07:38, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
It makes no sense to simply delete the category, you can discuss to move it on the disk there Kept. Mbdortmund (talk) 21:38, 9 December 2010 (UTC)