Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by ARFISA Representaciones, SCP

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.

Collection of advertisement. No evidence of permission(s).

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:42, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep all. What does "Collection of advertisement" mean? Who or what are they advertising? As images of specific types of nut and bolt are encyclopaedically useful, these meet our criteria as being of educational scope. Many are already in use and are often the only image we have of a specific fastener.

"No evidence of permission(s)" There is a licence tag added during upload by the uploader. There is no credible reason to discount this.

If we look at the uploader's talk page User talk:ARFISA Representaciones, SCP, we see the real reason for the multiple attacks on them, whether it's for "very low quality images", using non-English language, "advertising", "out of scope images" (many of these images are already in use at WP and engineering-interested editors were very grateful to have them too). Also the bulk tagging of images as "uncategorized" (they were categorized, just not in English) with of course zero effort made to categorize them is also unhelpful.

These images are of course bad because the editor uploading them is bad: commercial editors are simply unwelcome on Wikimedia projects – even when they are offering valuable content for free and are (or once were!) happy to freely license this. There is no more reason than that to this fatuous bulk deletion. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:06, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep: There’s no reason to doubt the licensing wholesale — or, if there is, then nominator should share it. As for «collection of advertisement», it is meaningless. Maybe some of these images should be deleted on various grounds — lack of quality in items for which we have a lot of superior media, for one — but a blanket deletion request such as this should not be accepted. -- Tuválkin 12:17, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. -- Tuválkin 10:49, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep It may be useful to advise the uploader on how a credit template could be used on their images, particularly if an OTRS reference might help stop future deletion requests. -- (talk) 12:45, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: apparently ok FASTILY 08:06, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]