Commons:Deletion requests/File:Laketahoewhalebeach.jpg
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Disruption by David Horvitz to have his art project on the Wikimedia Commons. See other related requests. —Ryūlóng (竜龙) 13:08, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Delete. This guys is a sockpuppeter who has disrupted Commons for years. All of his uploads should be deleted. Binksternet (talk) 16:14, 4 July 2014 (UTC)- Delete agreed - --WPPilot (talk) 21:14, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Delete, per nom, sockpuppet & not here to build encyclopedia but to build self up. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:20, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: see above Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 04:54, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- Undeleted We aren't in the business of deleting in scope images simply because of who uploaded it. Part of the required licencing here on Commons is that images can be modified; i.e. cropped and uploaded as a new image where deemed required by individual editors. russavia (talk) 12:08, 19 July 2014 (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.
This is one of several photographs by the artist David Horvitz whose sole purpose in uploading the photo is part of his nebulous art project where his body is in frame. There is no clear way of knowing if this photograph even has the correct licensing because it was uploaded by one of several sockpuppet and/or meatpuppet accounts operated by David Horvitz and has no place on this project. This was previously deleted through COM:DR already but Russavia undeleted it out of process. —Ryūlóng (竜龙) 16:14, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- After having been uploaded by so many multiple users, each claiming "own" work, it's not possible to know the copyright status of this image, COM:PRP suggests that items of this form of uncertain provenance be removed from the project. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:39, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
- Delete unclear (c)status --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:04, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Keep Nice shot. No serious question on copyright status.--Nowa (talk) 01:45, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
- There is no way that we can be 100% sure that this photo was uploaded by the actual copyright owner due to the massive amount of accounts involved. The copyright is unclear and you need to end your disruption of these projects in your ass backwards attempt to promote this guy.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 07:46, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
- Keep The nomination states who the photographer is. Great photo, how about we spend time doing something other than punishing Horvitz by deleting in scope content? --Fæ (talk) 08:04, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Deleted As with all the rest of the images from this series, we cannot know who actually took the picture and therefore who actually owns the copyright. Aside from that, this user's deliberate attempts to spam Commons with his pictures cannot be encouraged. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:28, 30 July 2014 (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.
Russavia undeleted this again to make a point when I went on the IRC channel asking for help in dealing with a recently discovered sockpuppet. —Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
- Keep There is zero doubt as to the authorship/copyright status of the images. It was taken on 27 April 2012 and uploaded on 1 May 2012. The image is high resolution and is in scope. Ryulong claims that the existence of File:A Nudist at Whale Beach Lake Tahoe.JPG is enough, and that the images are the same. They clearly are not. The image is in scope. Whilst the person in question may have uploaded some pointless, out-of-scope images, this is one example where there is no doubt as to its usefulness for our repository, being in scope of Category:Whale Beach, Lake Tahoe. russavia (talk) 23:54, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
- Whether or not it's in scope has nothing to do with the fact that you've undeleted this because of your counter-crusade against my work to have the photographs of this series off of the website due to the disruption and unclear copyright status. You don't get to go against a week old discussion just because you think the photo is useful when everyone else in all of these myriad discussions realized there might be issues with the rights as well as the fact that you are the only one to hold this view. We do not know the photographer. We just know the uploader and human subject. It's not like Horvitz keeps an Indonesian macaque with him to take the photo for him. There is no way he managed to set up a timer to get him yards away from the camera, and from the resolution he clearly doesn't have a remote control for the trigger on him.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:00, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
- For the record, I agree with russavia. I don't think there is any reasonable doubt that David Horvitz is the creator, uploader and rightful copyright holder of this image, no matter who actually snapped the shutter.--Nowa (talk) 02:00, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
- Whether or not it's in scope has nothing to do with the fact that you've undeleted this because of your counter-crusade against my work to have the photographs of this series off of the website due to the disruption and unclear copyright status. You don't get to go against a week old discussion just because you think the photo is useful when everyone else in all of these myriad discussions realized there might be issues with the rights as well as the fact that you are the only one to hold this view. We do not know the photographer. We just know the uploader and human subject. It's not like Horvitz keeps an Indonesian macaque with him to take the photo for him. There is no way he managed to set up a timer to get him yards away from the camera, and from the resolution he clearly doesn't have a remote control for the trigger on him.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:00, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
- Keep However, David you know you can resolve this nonsense about your sock game by writing to permissions-commons
wikimedia.org with a clear release statement for all your uploads, so please follow that path just to stop wasting everyone's time. I am keen to keep the good quality photographs you have released, but I will stop bothering to contribute to these discussions if the socks and dramah carry on, and on, as I have better ways to spend my volunteer time and my natural indulgence for this amusing fringe performance art has limits. --Fæ (talk) 07:33, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: If Russavia disagrees he can go to com:UNDEL just like everyone else. This is not the way. Natuur12 (talk) 09:15, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
