Commons:Deletion requests/2024/04/18

The building in question was only built in 2016. As a result and since there's no FOP in Greece this photo should be deleted. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ^{ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ} 09:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The building in question was only built in 2016. As a result and since there's no FOP in Greece this photo should be deleted. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ^{ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ} 09:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The building in question was only built in 2016. As a result and since there's no FOP in Greece this photo should be deleted. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ^{ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ} 09:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The building in question was only built in 2016. As a result and since there's no FOP in Greece this photo should be deleted. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ^{ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ} 09:50, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The building in question was only built in 2016. As a result and since there's no FOP in Greece this photo should be deleted. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ^{ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ} 09:50, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can Commons:De minimis apply? JopkeB (talk) 16:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The building in question was only built in 2016. As a result and since there's no FOP in Greece this photo should be deleted. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ^{ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ} 09:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The building in question was only built in 2016. As a result and since there's no FOP in Greece this photo should be deleted. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ^{ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ} 09:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first frame of the animation shows a GoogleMap --> CopyVio unless that frame can be deleted Enyavar (talk) 11:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation. No Freedom of Panorama for 2D or 3D artworks in the United States Headlock0225 (talk) 12:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The licensing info was submitted to me by the artist Bettina Witteveen. Here's the info from her:

ImageTitle: Bettina_WitteVeen-5_Wounds-The_Christa_Project-St_John_the_Divine-Photo01_by_Jeffrey_Sturges

5 Wounds Installation by Bettina WitteVeen (01) by Jeffrey Sturges is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

HTML:

5 Wounds Installation by Bettina WitteVeen (01) by Jeffrey Sturges is licensed under <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/?ref=chooser-v1" target="_blank" rel="license noopener noreferrer" style="display:inline-block;">CC BY-SA 4.0<img style="height:22px!important;margin-left:3px;vertical-align:text-bottom;" src="https://mirrors.creativecommons.org/presskit/icons/cc.svg?ref=chooser-v1"><img style="height:22px!important;margin-left:3px;vertical-align:text-bottom;" src="https://mirrors.creativecommons.org/presskit/icons/by.svg?ref=chooser-v1"><img style="height:22px!important;margin-left:3px;vertical-align:text-bottom;" src="https://mirrors.creativecommons.org/presskit/icons/sa.svg?ref=chooser-v1"></a>

Sherryleehoward (talk) 14:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sherryleehoward,

This looks like a solution but you will have to submit details via the Volunteer Response Team. Follow the following link for more details Commons:Volunteer Response Team

Headlock0225 (talk) 15:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation?? No Freedom of Panorama for art works in the United States. Headlock0225 (talk) 12:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The photo with licensing was submitted to me by the artist Bettina Witteveen. Here's the licensing info from her:

ImageTitle: Bettina_WitteVeen-When_We_Were_Soldiers_once_and_young-Crosses_Of_Suffering-BrooklynNavyYard

Crosses of Suffering from "When We Were Soldiers once and young" by Bettina WitteVeen is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0

HTML:

Crosses of Suffering from "When We Were Soldiers once and young" by Bettina WitteVeen is licensed under <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/?ref=chooser-v1" target="_blank" rel="license noopener noreferrer" style="display:inline-block;">CC BY-SA 4.0<img style="height:22px!important;margin-left:3px;vertical-align:text-bottom;" src="https://mirrors.creativecommons.org/presskit/icons/cc.svg?ref=chooser-v1"><img style="height:22px!important;margin-left:3px;vertical-align:text-bottom;" src="https://mirrors.creativecommons.org/presskit/icons/by.svg?ref=chooser-v1"><img style="height:22px!important;margin-left:3px;vertical-align:text-bottom;" src="https://mirrors.creativecommons.org/presskit/icons/sa.svg?ref=chooser-v1"></a>

Sherryleehoward (talk) 13:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sherryleehoward,

This looks like a solution but you will have to submit details via the Volunteer Response Team. Follow the following link for more details Commons:Volunteer Response Team Headlock0225 (talk) 15:10, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• extracted from File:Leoni, president Venuzuela (kop), Bestanddeelnr 917-6905.jpg

Raúl Leoni (1905-1972) was president of Venezuela from 1964-1969. The Venezuelan rule for anonymous works is 60 years from publication, so if the date in the file name is correct, this is still under copyright in Venezuela. In any case, in order for it to be free of the URAA copyright, it would have to have been published before 1936, when the subject was only 31. That seems very unlikely -- he appears to be at least 20 years older than that.

The image from which this is extracted has a CC-0 license. There is no evidence why a Dutch museum would have the right to freely license a work from an anonymous Venezuelan photographer. And there is no basis at all for the CC-BY-SA license on the extracted image .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•  Keep We have no evidence of the nationality of the photographer, only the sitter. In the absence of that knowledge, I would accept the Dutch CC-0 license. For instance we have images of US presidents released under a CC license by the German National Archives. Presumably taken by German photographers, or first published in Germany. --RAN (talk) 21:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ads on the pictures title.(Truva emlak com) Lucky34C (talk) 13:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•  Keep No need to delete due to filename, Lucky34C feel free to request rename at COM:MOVE. Consigned (talk) 12:29, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Adeletron 3030 as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G4|Re-upload of File:Act Fast Med Anti Choking Trainer.jpg Yann (talk) 13:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment The file is a re-upload of File:Act Fast Med Anti Choking Trainer.jpg so I thought it qualified as COM:SPEEDY#G4 but the uploader has submitted permissions to COM:VRT so I'm fine with removing the speedy tag. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 14:13, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per https://www.actfastmed.com/terms-of-use/ the contents do meet the required standards. I hope this helps Serrwinner (talk) 17:02, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not own work: No source for basemap provided. If this is GoogleMaps, it is a CopyVio (Com:PCP) Enyavar (talk) 14:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour, effectivement je me suis basé sur Google Maps sur lequel j'ai rajouté les sites sondés par mon arrière grand-père.
Que faut-il faire pour ce soit indiqué et donc acccepté
Merci 1943jcv (talk) 17:31, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1943jcv Google Maps n'est pas autorisé car il est protégé par des droits d'auteur. Consultez COM:MAPS pour plus d'informations sur les cartes autorisées. Consigned (talk) 12:32, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete based on Google Maps which is copyrighted. Consigned (talk) 12:32, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unused file, no description. Seems like an hoax document? Estopedist1 (talk) 14:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep. This is actually a great example of a Category:Sovereign citizen movement document, something which we don't seem to have many other images of. I've categorized it thus; the file description could use some updates to put it into context. Omphalographer (talk) 19:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely to be own work. Small images, File:Favory Pallavicina.jpg even has a watermark. The uploader also has some PD files incorrectly labeled as own work.

• File:Favory Pallavicina.jpg
• File:Schweiftasche.jpg
• File:Favory Pallavicina, Lipizzan Stallion.jpg

Didym (talk) 15:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Derivative works from posters. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•  Delete The posters are the main subject of the photo, shown by its name and usage on two political articles in FRWP, so exceeds COM:De minimis. If they were blurred, the photo would not have any educational purpose. Could the resolution be reduced so that it meets Commons:De minimis#Guidelines#5? Consigned (talk) 12:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Siegfried Stoitzner died in 1976, so not PD until 2047. Obviously not own work. Didym (talk) 15:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Too complex, exceeds COM:TOO IagoQnsi (talk) 15:40, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Reddit mascot is copyrighted Trade (talk) 16:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Grandmaster Huon as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Derivative work of copyrighted material. Made up of entirely copyrighted material. Yann (talk) 16:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The heart of the matter is what the photo (as it was uploaded to Flickr by the author) fundamentally represents – it is a clear showcase of the interior of a store, focusing primarily on the entrance and not on any specific copyrighted elements, such as products or promotional materials. I would like to note that ~40% of the image was cropped to further emphasize the store's entrance (or aisle), with the shelves in the background, which inherently does not center on any identifiable products. This modification has de-emphasized the presence of larger posters and a TV screen, which could potentially distract from the main subject of the photo. The cropping has also inadvertently made smaller posters and portions of posters at the entrance more noticeable. However, these elements do not change the overall intent of the photo – highlighting the bishōjo game store's interior – and they do not somehow become the photo's subject. They are part of the store's character, yes, but they are not why the photo was taken or what it seeks to show.

The principle of {{De minimis}} exists for situations exactly like this – where the copyrighted material is not the main subject of the work and does not substantially affect the work's value. Even if these elements (temporary promotional materials) were replaced or removed, it would not alter the photo's theme. It is still about the store's overall interior. → This has already been demonstrated by the initial cropping: the removal of posters located above the entrance and a TV screen did not degrade the photo's value; instead, it reduced the number of copyright elements visible in the frame and better highlighted the photo's intended subject. And if the presence or absence of any identifiable product does not change the subject of the photo, these copyright elements are incidental and de minimis to the overall image. Santer (talk) 19:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Crop from (an identical earlier enwiki version of File:Queensland state rugby league team (1952, Sydney).jpg, which was deleted due to restored US copyright (Commons:Deletion requests/File:Queensland state rugby league team (1952, Sydney).jpg). Felix QW (talk) 16:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative work of a copyrighted banner A1Cafel (talk) 16:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Docosong as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: previously deleted File:Firma santos.jpg Yann (talk) 16:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This seems too simple for a copyright, and it is in use. Yann (talk) 16:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image is the property of the Kalan Müzik company and can be sued by the company for copyright infringement. You can find information about this on the following sources: 1. https://tr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalan_M%C3%BCzik 2. https://kalan.com/ 3. https://www.indyturk.com/node/281936/t%C3%BCrki%CC%87yeden-sesler/83-y%C4%B1l-%C3%B6nce-idam-edilen-seyit-r%C4 %B1za-hakk%C4%B1nda-birka%C3%A7-farkl%C4%B1-not MamBarzani (talk) 16:24, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by XenonX3 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Stolen from [1] or elsewhere and edited without permission by the original author. Yann (talk) 16:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Drakosh as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8803304/. COM:TOO? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:29, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyright infringement. GIF-File at https://web.archive.org/web/20210127122305/http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/tracts/1958resolution.html (scroll down) in slightly smaller resolution. The commons uploader "Junkönig" can't prove that he was the owner of said website. Maybe he just stole the picture. As long as he can not prove it, I propose deleting it. 176.126.81.102 16:29, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will not try to prove it, as it would require giving personal data about my past Strictly-Genteel Theocratic website, which I don't want to do. So, fine, delete it. I'll try to find a new one in some other publications later. Junkönig (talk) 22:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•  Keep In the USA signatures are not copyrightable. --RAN (talk) 22:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Signatures themselves are not, but when the Strictly-Genteel website maker has restored a signature in GIF-format, that version is copyrighted. Similar to how an old movie is not copyrighted anymore, but the restored version by a still living person is. 176.126.81.102 07:30, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Fine, delete it if you want. Junkönig (talk) 20:58, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Logo of a music band, creative art, protected by copyright Huji (talk) 16:54, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown source, hard to believe the uploader own the image's copyright. Mısaka✨M1koto 17:14, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

single uploading by this user, thumbnail-like, unlike that own work Estopedist1 (talk) 17:47, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 18:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyvio: The uploader is not the author, as per metadata CoffeeEngineer (talk) 18:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not own works, proper source, date, author, and license must be provided.

• File:Conquista Muslaman Del'Ethiopia Ceasar Nezerrani 1849.jpg
• File:Kismayo districts map.png
• File:Tadrus title definition.webp
• File:Hirabu emir of Somalis.webp
• File:Garad Hirabu Goita Tedros.jpg
• File:Shimbra Kure Marehan.jpg
• File:An image of the Marehan Ugaasate.jpg
• File:Marehan Ugaasate 2.jpg
• File:Marehan Ugaasate.jpg
• File:Raas Mareexaan.webp
• File:Marehan awash presence.jpg
• File:Marehan Harar, a powerful tribe.png
• File:A map of Marehan Jamame.jpg
• File:Marehan Jamame2.jpg
• File:Marehan presence as far souh as Jamame and Jilib.jpg
• File:Lineage tree of Facaaye clan.png
• File:Sade sub clans in Afar.png
• File:Facaaye Doba.jpg
• File:Facaaye presence in Afar.jpg
• File:Somali Clan-Qabiil Map.png
• File:Sultanate of Ifat 1290.png

Yann (talk) 18:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete File:Garad Hirabu Goita Tedros.jpg It is a public domain image (artist died in 1899), but a better quality version without the watermark already is here, File:Schreyer Adolf The Warrier Oil On Canvas.jpg —Tcr25 (talk) 19:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment My pet peeve here are the falsified maps. A lot of the stuff is old enough to be in PD noW, I am just not comfortable with the wording (everything "must be provided") of the DR: If an uploader can be reasonably certain of PD, is it really necessary to exactly pinpoint the creation date to 1881 and name Fitzgerald Artist Johnson as the creator? Sure these are not own work, and the uploader should rectify that attribution in all images they want to keep. But let us be frank with the uploader: What Commons doesn't need are low-res scans where someone scribbled arrows on top with MS paint, and neither do we need self-made maps that provide no sources at all. Please stay away from images you find anywhere on the web, instead upload high-res scans of the whole work like you seemed able to provide (in the detail sections), don't smear crude arrows on the pictures, and if possible state the creation date and author to the best of your knowledge. This will avoid deletion in the future. --Enyavar (talk) 07:31, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Enyavar! Loranchet (talk) 09:23, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You need at least a realist approximate date, a source, and an author. Yann (talk) 12:07, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect Overvecht3301 (talk) 19:59, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 20:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work. By alvils-ronalds-bijons. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 20:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 20:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted image ⲔⲖⲞⲢⲠⲒⲔⲢⲒⲚ (talk) 22:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

bad quality KaiKemmann (talk) 22:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Solicitud de borrado solicitada por el autor Aroblesm (talk) 22:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment The courtesy deletion period ended years ago, so if this is in scope, it should be kept. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by 83.215.127.140 as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Urheberrechtsverletztung. Abgebildete Personen haben das Bild nicht freigegeben.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:16, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]