Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2013/02/09
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
Obvious copyright violation. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 04:28, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: by Magister Mathematicae Morning ☼ (talk) 07:50, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Offensive version of Israeli flag with hooked nose instead of Star of David — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 05:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Delete – Unencyclopaedic file. Bad faith upload.—Bill william comptonTalk 05:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)- If its only function is to allow one user to vent racist bigotry, then must be deleted... AnonMoos (talk) 08:11, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 09:26, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Wrong redirect from boxing groin guard (current tite) to falconry equipment Blackfish (talk) 09:12, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontroversial relict of a file move. High Contrast (talk) 09:17, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope: non notable people. BrightRaven (talk) 10:36, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: deleted as part of cleanup of uploads russavia (talk) 10:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Commons is no private photo archive. --High Contrast (talk) 10:44, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Copyright unclear. Fry1989 eh? 22:00, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Non-trivial logo. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:08, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Incorporates Hello Kitty image. Derivative work of copyrighted character. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 04:36, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. De minimis cannot be claimed. Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 20:24, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted images on poster Morning ☼ (talk) 00:53, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 19:32, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted images on poster Morning ☼ (talk) 00:53, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 19:32, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted images on poster Morning ☼ (talk) 00:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 19:33, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
per COM:DW, collection of images whose sorces and permission aren't known Morning ☼ (talk) 00:55, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:16, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but this object of Gae Aulenti (died 1 November 2012) is too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome). Raoli ✉ (talk) 01:00, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Keep it's a regular furniture (utilitarian item), just a piece of design, design is freely uploadable on commons, see i.g. Category:Chairs by designer. Also have a look at this deletion request and linked pages (especially this and especially this supporting argument by a Commons admin). BTW, the picture wasn't even shot in Italy but France, and it was not outdoor but indoor (Musée des Arts Décoratifs, Paris), so the FOP argument is invalid. --Sailko (talk) 07:46, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Neutral Also in France there is no FoP, and the the picture wasn't shot outdoor but indoor, so even if there was FoP in France, this would not be a FoP case, so this is a simple case of copyright violation because Gae Aulenti died 1 November 2012 and this picture is a derivative work of an her work of art (this original chair). But there is long discussion that finished to keep a similar case of copyviol.--Dega180 (talk) 10:28, 9 February 2013 (UTC)- Utilitarian work are NOT considered work of art in Commons. I am sure about this, we would not have any picture of cars/computers/object instead. Fop is something else. --Sailko (talk) 09:26, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep In this photo are present temporary allestiment with object for mass use: intended for an usage mass, everyday objects and furniture (lamps, chandeliers), the European Union is not expected to be restrictions apply to the works of art to mass-produced objects and destined for industrial use. The EU has warned Italy even if FLOS-SEMERARO for having protected the Arco lamp by the decay of rights. This is not a work of art, the only coverage that protects an object of industrial design are the intellectual property rights of the patent. You are not only misinterpreting a law of 1941, which does not explain well what it's about, but you are also breaking a European law today.--Pava (talk) 12:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- Sailko, quanto hai aspettato a dire che si trova in Francia? Un secolo. è un'informazione che cambia le cose. la legislazione francese è anch'essa no fop ma è possibile che tratti diversamente oggetti e installazioni. Per questo prendo le distanze dalla mia proposta. Del diritto d'autore francese non so se e come si differenzia da quello italiano. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:14, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- Se questa è un esemplare di sedia prodotta industrialmente o un prototipo di un futuro oggetto industriale allora può rimanere su commons, se invece è un esemplare unico privo di scopi industriali, ma semplicemente un'opera d'arte a forma di sedia allora aimé si è da cancellare, tuttavia: 1) segnalare come discussione il parco della musica è secondo me un'analogia errata, bisognerebbe ridiscutere ad hoc su questo argomento prima di iniziare a cancellare immagini 2) dobbiamo sapere esattamente di che tipo di opera si tratta, se si tratta di un'opera d'arte o di un prodotti di design industriale, 3) sapere se ha autorizzazione o no da parte dell'espositore o da parte del progettista. Non è che possiamo mettere in cancellazione un'immagine per una nostra interpretazione della legge, o per deduzioni sulle lacune di esse ecc.. ecc.. --Pava (talk) 22:27, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- A quanto pare l'analogia con il Parco della Musica c'è sempre poichè si tratta sempre di FoP. In questo caso però è stato appurato a posteriori che l'immagine è stata scattata su suolo francese. Dal punto del FOP l'immagine è da cancellare poichè si tratta di una immagine su suole francese in cui non è presente la libertà di panorama. L'eccezione francese riguarda l'accessorietà o accidentalità e non casi standard come questo. Dunque si deve procedere più o meno come ha indicato Pava. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:11, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Se questa è un esemplare di sedia prodotta industrialmente o un prototipo di un futuro oggetto industriale allora può rimanere su commons, se invece è un esemplare unico privo di scopi industriali, ma semplicemente un'opera d'arte a forma di sedia allora aimé si è da cancellare, tuttavia: 1) segnalare come discussione il parco della musica è secondo me un'analogia errata, bisognerebbe ridiscutere ad hoc su questo argomento prima di iniziare a cancellare immagini 2) dobbiamo sapere esattamente di che tipo di opera si tratta, se si tratta di un'opera d'arte o di un prodotti di design industriale, 3) sapere se ha autorizzazione o no da parte dell'espositore o da parte del progettista. Non è che possiamo mettere in cancellazione un'immagine per una nostra interpretazione della legge, o per deduzioni sulle lacune di esse ecc.. ecc.. --Pava (talk) 22:27, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Sailko, quanto hai aspettato a dire che si trova in Francia? Un secolo. è un'informazione che cambia le cose. la legislazione francese è anch'essa no fop ma è possibile che tratti diversamente oggetti e installazioni. Per questo prendo le distanze dalla mia proposta. Del diritto d'autore francese non so se e come si differenzia da quello italiano. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:14, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- In quella discussione si è votato per cancellare un edificio che si è ritenuto violare la questione FOP, nel campo della produzione industriale quella votazione non è valida, c'era consenso li per un edificio, non vuol dire che ci sia consenso anche per il prodotto di design industriale. Riguardo questa foto in particolare, si tratta di capire di che tipo di oggetto si tratta, fino a quel momento non possiamo permetterci di cancellarla, nè questa nè il resto analogo a questo --Pava (talk) 23:48, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Non è un esemplare unico, lo capirebbe anche un bambino che Gae Aulenti non può aver piegato i tubi di acciaio a mano, né aver ricamato il tessuto (che è stampato). E' un prodotto industriale, che si trovava in una sala di un museo dedicata appunto al design (non alle sculture che hanno forma di oggetti quotidiani). I prodotti industriali, comprese le sedie, non sono coperti da diritti di riproduzione fotografica, almeno secondo come la pensano i commonari, per chi ha ancora qualche dubbio pregherei di rileggersi le pagine che linkavo nei miei primi interventi. --Sailko (talk) 17:02, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep For the same reason as Saiko --Nevertime (talk) 13:10, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep In my opinion it's an utilitarian object. It's a (n industrial) chair, a simple object with practical purpose (to sit on, of course...). Instead of copyright protection, it is probably protected by design patent. Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 13:45, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
- Non è un esemplare unico, lo capirebbe anche un bambino che Gae Aulenti non può aver piegato i tubi di acciaio a mano, né aver ricamato il tessuto (che è stampato). E' un prodotto industriale, che si trovava in una sala di un museo dedicata appunto al design (non alle sculture che hanno forma di oggetti quotidiani). I prodotti industriali, comprese le sedie, non sono coperti da diritti di riproduzione fotografica, almeno secondo come la pensano i commonari, per chi ha ancora qualche dubbio pregherei di rileggersi le pagine che linkavo nei miei primi interventi. --Sailko (talk) 17:02, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
- In quella discussione si è votato per cancellare un edificio che si è ritenuto violare la questione FOP, nel campo della produzione industriale quella votazione non è valida, c'era consenso li per un edificio, non vuol dire che ci sia consenso anche per il prodotto di design industriale. Riguardo questa foto in particolare, si tratta di capire di che tipo di oggetto si tratta, fino a quel momento non possiamo permetterci di cancellarla, nè questa nè il resto analogo a questo --Pava (talk) 23:48, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Comment The name of chair is "Locus Solus lounge chair", I invite you to search it on google to decide if it is an artwork or not.--dega180 (talk) 10:31, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- Repetita iuvant, anche le opere del disegno industriale che presentino di per sé carattere creativo e valore artistico sono protette dal diritto di autore. Per cui andrebbero cancellate foto di sedie, utensili, macchine, oggetti prodotti industrialmente scattate in Italia. Ciò è scritto qui art.2 comma 10 e in http://www.mi.camcom.it/upload/file/339/169541/FILENAME/Magelli.pdf. Comunque questa non è opera del diritto industriale. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 01:09, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- Raoli anche io ho cercato di fare l'avvocato del diavolo e cercare di trovare il cavillo che ci permetta di scattare foto ad oggetti prodotti su scala industriale, ma purtroppo non ho trovato niente, da quanto sembra pubblicare sotto CC BY-SA la foto di questa sedia vuol dire che io posso creare liberamente qualsiasi opera derivata (bidimensionale o tridimensionale) da quella fotografia, anche a fini di lucro, il che vuol dire che io posso prendere tutta, o solo un pezzetto di quella fotografia e farne una nuova opera, teoricamente io posso copiare quella sedia, costruirla in tre dimensioni e venderla, perché la CC BY-SA me ne da il permesso! Purtroppo se dovessimo seguire la legge alla lettera dovremmo cancellare tutte quelle fotografie nelle quali il design è una parte rilevante dell'oggetto. Dunque per esempio anche tutte le fotografie di automobili: la nuova 500 vende bene anche perché ha un bel design. Dato che io sono per il rispetto della legge cambio la mia valutazione rispetto a questa immagine.--dega180 (talk) 13:33, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- (f.c.) @ Dega. Dato che hai citato la nuova 500, e come tu stesso affermi, in base alla legge gran parte delle foto presenti in Category:Fiat 500 (2007) sono ospitate su Commons in violazione della legge e pertanto andrebbero messe in cancellazione. Non solo, la stessa cosa per la mitica 500 Category:Fiat 500 prodotta dal 1957 al 1975. E siamo solo all'inizio! La legge è legge e vale per tutti (e per tutto) allo stesso modo. Non possiamo applicarla a nostra discrezione e/o lontanamente pensare di poter chiudere un occhio. Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 16:49, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- Raoli anche io ho cercato di fare l'avvocato del diavolo e cercare di trovare il cavillo che ci permetta di scattare foto ad oggetti prodotti su scala industriale, ma purtroppo non ho trovato niente, da quanto sembra pubblicare sotto CC BY-SA la foto di questa sedia vuol dire che io posso creare liberamente qualsiasi opera derivata (bidimensionale o tridimensionale) da quella fotografia, anche a fini di lucro, il che vuol dire che io posso prendere tutta, o solo un pezzetto di quella fotografia e farne una nuova opera, teoricamente io posso copiare quella sedia, costruirla in tre dimensioni e venderla, perché la CC BY-SA me ne da il permesso! Purtroppo se dovessimo seguire la legge alla lettera dovremmo cancellare tutte quelle fotografie nelle quali il design è una parte rilevante dell'oggetto. Dunque per esempio anche tutte le fotografie di automobili: la nuova 500 vende bene anche perché ha un bel design. Dato che io sono per il rispetto della legge cambio la mia valutazione rispetto a questa immagine.--dega180 (talk) 13:33, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Delete I changed my opinion about this deletion request, in the italian law (Legge 22 aprile 1941 n. 633 art.2 comma 10) is written:
In particolare sono comprese nella protezione:
10) Le opere del disegno industriale che presentino di per sé carattere creativo e valore artistico.
in English:
In particular are included in the protection:
10) Works of industrial design that presents themselves creative character and artistic value
so this chair whit an evident creative character is protected by copyright and we can't freely copy it as stated in CC BY-SA.--dega180 (talk) 13:43, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- Dega, riguardo questa confusione che fate fra diritto d'autore e FOP leggi qui Commons:Bar_italiano#Campagna_di_cancellazione_per_il_NO-FOP_Italy_.28_.C3.A8_fatta_molto_male.29 in particolare il contributo di Trixt. Inoltre questo non è un caso italiano, quindi è inutile che riporti la legge italiana. Ultima cosa: avere dei diritti d'autore o dei diritti intellettuali su un oggetto, non vuol dire che tali diritti siano i medesimi di un'opera d'arte (design industriale non è considerato opera d'arte, sennò i diritti applicatovi non durerebbero così poco) ciao --Pava (talk) 15:42, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- Scusate ma io avevo capito che la foto era stata scattata in Italia. Purtroppo non conosco la legge sul copyright francese ma penso proprio che anche per la francia non cambi molto la faccenda, non credo che in francia tu possa copiare liberamente il design degli oggetti altrui e ripeto che, essendo questa foto scattata in un interno, il panorama non c'entra niente. Ultima cosa: il copyright è uguale per tutto, o ce l'hai o non ce l'hai, non è che per un oggetto hai un particolare tipo di copyright e per un altro non ce l'hai, se la legge prevede che l'autore possa detenere il copyright sul design vuol dire che per copiare quel tipo di design serve il permesso dell'autore, tant'è vero che la legge Italiana elenca tutti i casi in cui uno ottiene i diritti d'autore in un unico/stesso articolo.--dega180 (talk) 19:22, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- Dega, riguardo questa confusione che fate fra diritto d'autore e FOP leggi qui Commons:Bar_italiano#Campagna_di_cancellazione_per_il_NO-FOP_Italy_.28_.C3.A8_fatta_molto_male.29 in particolare il contributo di Trixt. Inoltre questo non è un caso italiano, quindi è inutile che riporti la legge italiana. Ultima cosa: avere dei diritti d'autore o dei diritti intellettuali su un oggetto, non vuol dire che tali diritti siano i medesimi di un'opera d'arte (design industriale non è considerato opera d'arte, sennò i diritti applicatovi non durerebbero così poco) ciao --Pava (talk) 15:42, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Delete I totally and unconditional agree with Raoli and Dega180. Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 16:57, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Abstain After careful consideration I prefer to abstain. Sorry if I wasted your time. Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 17:14, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Neutral I changed another time my opinion. I did not realize that this photo was taken in France, since I don't know the French copyright law I don't express any opinion about this deletion request.--dega180 (talk) 17:09, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Per discussion. Please be careful when opening RfD SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 00:42, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyvio. Derivative work of a picture (or a part of collective pictures: File:Wanted Armenian political fugitives - April 2008.jpg) whose source and license we don't know. Takabeg (talk) 01:19, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:18, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Because i will not be using these images relvant 01:51, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader request Morning ☼ (talk) 07:51, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
i need my picture to be removed because its accountable to everyone. Rifle artist (talk) 21:44, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader request of unused image Tabercil (talk) 01:17, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Because i will not be using these images relvant 01:53, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader request Morning ☼ (talk) 07:52, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but these objects of Arnaldo Pomodoro (living person) are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome). Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:18, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:34, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but this building of Alessandro Mendini (living person) is too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome). Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:20, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:34, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but this object of Domenico Paladino (living person) is too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption. Like the Louvre Pyramid case.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome). Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:34, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:35, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but this installation is too recent (2007) and Italy has no FOP exemption (for interior and exterior).
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome). Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:57, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:36, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:26, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but this sculpture of Renata Cuneo (died in 1995) is too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
and File:Fontana Lotta tra uomo e lo squalo, Savona, 2013.JPG
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome). Raoli ✉ (talk) 03:02, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:29, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but this sculpture of Gianni Guerra (living people) is too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome). Raoli ✉ (talk) 03:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:35, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Personal picture of uploader with no educational value, used as a promotional mean on the English Wikipedia. —Bill william comptonTalk 05:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:28, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Esta imagen la hice yo, pero dice "SAMSUNG" que es una marca registrada. Ya hice otra imagen sin la marca, este archivo no se usa más. Disculpen las molestias. Spooler (talk) 05:18, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 03:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Esta imagen la hice yo, pero dice "SAMSUNG" que es una marca registrada. Ya hice otra imagen sin la marca, este archivo no se usa más. Disculpen las molestias. Spooler (talk) 05:19, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 03:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Esta imagen la hice yo, pero dice "SAMSUNG" que es una marca registrada. Ya hice otra imagen sin la marca, este archivo no se usa más. Disculpen las molestias. Spooler (talk) 05:20, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 03:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Esta imagen la hice yo, pero dice "SAMSUNG" que es una marca registrada. Ya hice otra imagen sin la marca, este archivo no se usa más. Disculpen las molestias. Spooler (talk) 05:22, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 03:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Esta imagen la hice yo, pero dice "SAMSUNG" que es una marca registrada. Ya hice otra imagen sin la marca, este archivo no se usa más. Disculpen las molestias. Spooler (talk) 05:22, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 03:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Esta imagen la hice yo, pero dice "SAMSUNG" que es una marca registrada. Ya hice otra imagen sin la marca, este archivo no se usa más. Disculpen las molestias. Spooler (talk) 05:22, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 03:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Copyvio per Commons:Freedom of panorama#Azerbaijan. Takabeg (talk) 07:51, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Unclear copyright status: 1953 cover of a Brazilian magazine, not in PD. Permission needed. Gunnex (talk) 08:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
It is not good for wikipedia. Toilet (talk) 10:03, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Not a valid reason for deletion. INeverCry 00:31, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Not good for wikipedia Toilet (talk) 10:09, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep per previous discussion Commons:Deletion requests/File:Two girls peeing..jpg. Statment "Not good for wikipedia" is vague, not a reason for deletion. -- Infrogmation (talk) 13:42, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Not a valid reason for deletion. INeverCry 00:31, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of project scope. -Kattegatt (talk) 10:19, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- In what way? - Tournesol (talk) 18:32, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Se http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Användardiskussion:Kattegatt#File:Flogstaskriket.jpg. /Kattegatt (talk) 18:41, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- No, you have requested the deletion here at Wikimedia Commons, so I think you should explain here. And please do so in English, since Commons isn't a Swedish language project. - Tournesol (talk) 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC
- Keep Can't see why the image would be out of the project scope - rather the contrary. // Romulus74 (talk) 22:19, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- After Elinnea on Swedish Wikipedia showed me this link, i think the file should be kept. An administrator can close this discussion. /Kattegatt (talk) 08:03, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- No, you have requested the deletion here at Wikimedia Commons, so I think you should explain here. And please do so in English, since Commons isn't a Swedish language project. - Tournesol (talk) 19:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC
- Se http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Användardiskussion:Kattegatt#File:Flogstaskriket.jpg. /Kattegatt (talk) 18:41, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
The picture comes from "Ville de Périgueux", uploaded by " Grenesche", probably the "Chargée de mission au cabinet du maire Ville de Périgueux", but what about the photographer Nicolas Lux : we need OTRS from him to be sure he wants put this photo under CC-By-SA --MGuf (d) 11:19, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
derivated version of a picture deleted because: "Media missing permission as of 1 June 2011" (see the older version of the page). A supposed athorisation from "Management of Maria Riesch" is not enought, we need OTRS from the photographer. --MGuf (d) 11:31, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
no educational value Torsch (talk) 11:33, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation. Small files with no EXIF and own work claims are doubtful. This file should be deleted as per COM:PRP. Takabeg (talk) 13:04, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation. Small files with no EXIF and own work claims are doubtful. This file should be deleted as per COM:PRP. Takabeg (talk) 13:07, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
FoP problem: There is copyright protection in Denmark on sculptures. Fnielsen (talk) 13:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
This seems to be fair user rather than CC-BY-SA as it is apparently a still image from a film. Fnielsen (talk) 13:16, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- I am wrong here. It should be maintained! The uploader (Christian Görmer) is the cameraman on the documentary. This is apparent from the userpage User:TFoA and the German page on the movie — Fnielsen (talk) 22:03, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
personal photo possibly with bad file name Mjrmtg (talk) 14:14, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 19:53, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal image, out of scope Ignacio 
(discusión) 14:27, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Kept: In use. Yann (talk) 19:52, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal image, out of scope Ignacio (discusión) 14:27, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Kept: In use. Yann (talk) 19:55, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Possible copyvio. The same image was used in Report! am on 21 June 2010. {{Own work}} claim is doubtful. Takabeg (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 19:54, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope (as well as Wikipedia): QR-code for book. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Probably not own work. Yann (talk) 15:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Probably not own work. Yann (talk) 16:08, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Unclear copyright status. Yann (talk) 16:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Source images probably not free. Yann (talk) 16:12, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Probably not own work. Yann (talk) 16:12, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: unused text-only animated GIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:21, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 19:56, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Probably not own work. Yann (talk) 16:29, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Probably not own work. Yann (talk) 16:33, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Probably not own work. Yann (talk) 16:34, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:37, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 20:00, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:39, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:38, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
No educational content. Out of project scope. GeorgHH • talk 16:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 20:03, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Low quality image of domesticated horse. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:38, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 20:04, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 23:44, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
Speedy delete - Should be deleted as Criteria for speedy deletion: G4 (i.e. Recreation of content previously deleted per community consensus).--ARTEST4ECHO talk 16:47, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
- Recreation of what?
The previous DR was closed on 2013-02-14 and the file we’re discussing here now was created (trusting its EXIF) on 2015-06-03… -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:31, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
- Recreation of what?
- Delete, per nom. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:31, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:17, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
The medal itself is definitely public domain, there can be no dispute about that. But this is not the medal that we are hosting here, it is the photograph of it. As such, due to the fact that the medal is 3 dimensional, it is more than likely that it holds copyright. Sinnamon (talk) 17:11, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Good grief! Are you kidding? All material including photographs, speeches, documents etc contained on Russian governmental web sites are public domain. The law is quite explicite and crystal clear. Talk about splitting hairs! This is the kind of stupidity and over zealessness that convinces people to leave Wiki and never return... I thought it was because the original link had died due to the revamp of most Russian federal web sites but no... It was this unbelievably moronic reasoning! Does anybody look after you on Wiki or do you come up with these on your own without having to answer to higher authority (and IQ)? I am simply flabbergasted... In any case, I've replaced the photo on all pages where it was used by one I took myself, but had I read this prior to my action, I wouldn't have bothered, I would've just ripped the plug right out of the wall. And by the way, for your info, your statement about the medal being public domain is completely erroneous! Such items are protected by Russian Law and cannot leave the borders of the Federation, only pictures of it are! Read the law, it's on the bloody page!
- Seriously mate! Give your brain a chance! Fdutil (talk) 18:37, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- «All material including photographs, speeches, documents etc contained on Russian governmental web sites are public domain.». Answer: No! What you refere to on the file description page is the design of the medal, any photo of it has a copyright. Delete, clear copyright violation. --Martin H. (talk) 18:58, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- «All material including photographs, speeches, documents etc contained on Russian governmental web sites are public domain.». Answer: No! What you refere to on the file description page is the design of the medal, any photo of it has a copyright.
- I would like to express my apology for angering you. This wasn't my intention. But please don't start being abusive. This is a copyright violation. It is irrelevant whether or not Russia allows a medal to be taken outside of the country, because that's not a copyright issue at all, and Commons doesn't respect those. If you were to take the medal outside of Russia and photograph it yourself and release it in public domain, it'd be allowed, but if it is a photo that somebody else took, you have no right to release it. Sinnamon (talk) 17:34, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:40, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Not own work. User blocked for copyvios. Yann (talk) 17:42, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:40, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
obvious copyvio DHN (talk) 18:21, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:40, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Personal picture of user, not in use anywhere, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 18:32, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 20:05, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
No educational value as no characters can be recognized. Torsch (talk) 19:39, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:40, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
This looks like a composite of other pictures with additional material perhaps added by the uploader. Probably violates the copyright of each individual picture. Bbb23 (talk) 20:00, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 20:06, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Two problems here. It is claimed that the MT Abraham Center owns the copyright to this and other works. That is very unlikely. as the copyright almost always belongs to the artist's heirs. Seond, it is claimed that the Abraham Center has given permission. Their web site is ARR, so that also seems unlikely. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:28, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hello! The release form is included in OTRS, you are free to contact the sender to confirm the information. I would imagine that's the simplest way to clear up issue. Best, Zanglazor (talk) 00:31, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Withdrawn by nom -- see OTRS #2013020910003827 . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 01:26, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyright status unclear. Fry1989 eh? 21:31, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:42, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Copyright unclear. Fry1989 eh? 21:36, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:42, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
possible copyvio - small size - no EXIF - several images uploaded by this user were taken from skyscrapercity.com, including 2 that were similiar to this one INeverCry 22:03, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 03:12, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Taken from a TV series, copyright vio. Rapsar (talk) 22:25, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:42, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 77.164.22.132 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://www.wapenschilder.nl/expertise INeverCry 22:26, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 03:11, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 77.164.22.132 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://www.wapenschilder.nl/expertise INeverCry 22:26, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 03:11, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Amada44 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://www.mn.uio.no/sfe/english/student-life/organizations/startuio.html INeverCry 22:29, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 03:12, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Redundant to File:Osama bin Laden portrait.jpg, which is a larger and less pixelated image without annoying text. —Yutsi Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 22:42, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 20:07, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
possible copyvio - not sure if this is simple enough for {{PD-Textlogo}} INeverCry 22:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 03:11, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Likely copyvio Izno (talk) 23:30, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
The image does not show US Senator Thomas H. Williams from Mississippi, but US Representative Thomas Williams from Pennsylvania. In en:Thomas Williams (Pennsylvania) the same image is seen (File:TWilliams-PA.jpg). In this case, the Congressional Bioguide is completely wrong; the image is made by Mathew Brady, who did not publish Images before 1855. The Library of Congress entry also says that it was made between 1860 and 1875. Scooter (talk) 21:28, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as a low sized duplicate, but redirected. JuTa 08:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Images from User:Alberto ECJ
[edit]- File:LMC AAO.png
- File:Ganimedes.png
- File:Abell1367.png
- File:Anillos_de_Saturno.png
- And all the other uploads from the user.
They are all claimed to be "own work" while this is clearly false information. I've deleted already a copyvio File:Hollo Blanco.png when I saw all the other iimages, so I think it's more convenient to review the case here. His talk page lists other previous copyvios. ---- Magister Mathematicae 00:30, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:15, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but these stations and objects are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:Metro piazza borsa.jpeg of Karim Rashid (living person) and Alessandro Mendini (living person)
- File:Università stazione.jpg of Karim Rashid (living person) and Alessandro Mendini (living person)
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:02, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:55, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:19, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but these stations and objects are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:061214 011 Metro arte.jpg of Alessandro Mendini (living person)
- File:061214 055 Metro arte k.jpg of Alessandro Mendini (living person)
- File:061214 055 Metro arte.jpg of Alessandro Mendini (living person)
- File:Salvator Rosa station (Naples Metro) - modern art work.jpg of Enzo Cucchi, Raffaella Nappo, LuCa, Natalino Zullo, Quintino Scolavino e Santolo De Luca
- File:Salvator Rosa1.jpg of Salvatore e Domenico Palladino and Alex Mocika, Augusto Perez. Renato Barisani, Lucio Del Pezzo, Nino Longobardi, Riccardo Dalisi, Ugo Marano
- File:Salvator Rosa3.jpg of Alessandro Mendini (living person)
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:03, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:53, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:19, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but these stations and objects are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:Napoli - MN Linea 1.jpg of Mario Merz (died in 2003)
- File:Piazza vanvitelli, metropolitana.jpg of Michele Capobianco (died in 2005)
- File:Stazione di p.zza Vanvitelli.jpg of Mario Merz (died in 2003)
- File:Vanvitelli station in naples. Merz.jpg of Mario Merz (died in 2003)
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:04, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:56, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Cecco Bonanotte
[edit]Sorry, but these objects of Cecco Bonanotte (living person) are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:44, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Umberto Mastroianni
[edit]Sorry, but these objects or building of Umberto Mastroianni (died in 1998) are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:19, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:55, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Pietro Consagra
[edit]Sorry, but this building of Pietro Consagra (died in 2005) is too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:21, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:51, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but these sculptures or objects are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:1960 le donne.jpg of Toni Benetton (died in 1996)
- File:Cesena-MonumentoDonBaronio.jpg of Leonardo Lucchi (living person)
- File:Franco fossi 01.jpg of Franco Fossi (living person)
- File:Saint George sculpture domegge.JPG of Augusto Murer (died in 1985)
- File:Santa Croce Foscolo.jpg of Antonio Berti (died in 1990)
- File:Monumento Alcide Degasperi Trento.JPG of Antonio Berti (died in 1990)
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:23, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Define "too recent". Foscolo died in 1827. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:38, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Why should they delete it? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:40, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- For no-FOP. Raoli ✉ (talk) 05:05, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- So Michelangelo's David would be off-limits too? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:17, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- No, in Europe copyright expires 70 years after author's death, so Michelangelo's works are ok, while those listed hare not. Delete --Jaqen (talk) 14:02, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- No, in Europe copyright expires 70 years after author's death, so Michelangelo's works are ok, while those listed hare not.
- So Michelangelo's David would be off-limits too? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 06:17, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- For no-FOP. Raoli ✉ (talk) 05:05, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- Why should they delete it? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:40, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete File:Santa Croce Foscolo.jpg. I had no idea it was so recent. Wknight94 talk 03:37, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- File:Santa Croce Foscolo.jpg is a sculpture of Antonio Berti (died in 1990). --Raoli ✉ (talk) 22:53, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- I know - I'm agreeing with you. Wknight94 talk 21:03, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:22, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- Undeleted: one file as per [1]. Yann (talk) 17:17, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
Files in Category:Aldo Andreani
[edit]Sorry, but these buildings of Aldo Andreani (died in 1971) are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:27, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:39, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:22, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- Undeleted the first per UDR since this building is PD-ItalyGov. Abzeronow (talk) 19:59, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Files in Category:Mauro Perrucchetti
[edit]Sorry, but these sculptures of Mauro Perrucchetti (living person) are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:Mauro Perrucchetti - Jelly Babies (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG
- File:Mauro Perrucchetti - Jelly Babies - closeup (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG
- File:Mauro Perrucchetti - Michelangelo 2020 (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG
- File:Mauro Perrucchetti - Modern Heroes (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG
- File:Mauro Perrucchetti - Modern Heroes - closeup (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG
- File:Mauro Perrucchetti - Modern Heroes - closeup2 (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:28, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:46, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:22, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but these sculptures are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:Cracking Art Group - Snails (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG of Cracking Art Group (existing group of artists)
- File:Lorenzo Quinn - La dolce vita (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG of Lorenzo Quinn (living person)
- File:Lorenzo Quinn - La dolce vita - closeup (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG of Lorenzo Quinn (living person)
- File:Pierluigi Slis - Cesare (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG of Pierluigi Slis (living person)
- File:Romero Britto - Azul (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG of Romero Britto (living person)
- File:Romero Britto - Just For you (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG of Romero Britto (living person)
- File:Salvador Dalì - Nobility of Time (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG of Salvador Dalí (died in 1989)
- File:Salvador Dalì - Surrealist piano (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG of Salvador Dalí (died in 1989)
- File:Salvador Dalì - Surrealist piano - closeup (La Casina Valadier, Rome).JPG of Salvador Dalí (died in 1989)
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:30, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:52, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:23, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but these objects are too recent (2010) and Italy has no FOP exemption (for interior and exterior).
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:Camparitivo in Triennale (serata).jpg
- File:Camparitivo in Triennale.jpg
- File:Triennale di Milano – “Milan Design Week”, Neoreal Canon.jpg
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:36, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:53, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:24, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Venice Biennale pavilions
[edit]Sorry, but this building of Sverre Fehn (died in 2009) is too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption (for interior and exterior).
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:Sverre Fehn Nordic biennale pavilion-1.jpg
- File:Sverre Fehn Nordic biennale pavilion-2.jpg
- File:Sverre Fehn Nordic biennale pavilion-3.jpg
- File:Sverre Fehn Nordic biennale pavilion-4.jpg
- File:Sverre Fehn Nordic biennale pavilion-5.jpg
- File:Sverre Fehn Nordic biennale pavilion-6.jpg
- File:Sverre Fehn Nordic biennale pavilion-7.jpg
- File:Sverre Fehn Nordic biennale pavilion-8.jpg
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:51, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:26, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:FoP-Italy
[edit]Sorry, but these buildings are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption (for interior and exterior).
The simpler choice. (Fop-Italy)
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:Church of St. John the Baptist in Settimo Milanese (MI), Italy.JPG
- File:Interior of Church of St. John the Baptist in Settimo Milanese (MI), Italy.JPG
- File:Maria Madre della Chiesa (Buccinasco).JPG
- File:Palacongressi di Riccione, 2012.jpg
Raoli ✉ (talk) 03:01, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:45, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:26, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:FoP-Italy
[edit]Derivative work per Commons:Freedom of panorama#Italy
- File:Chiesa di sant'antonio, pisa, lato.JPG
- File:Chiesa parrocchiale 01.jpg
- File:Comune di Chiari.JPG
- File:Entrata Mediopadana AV.JPG
- File:Expo 2015 (17168928657).jpg
- File:Expo 2015 - Michelangelo Pistoletto - Third Paradise - The Reinstated Apple (17439898949).jpg
- File:Expo 2015 - Michelangelo Pistoletto - Third Paradise - The Reinstated Apple (17946999286).jpg
- File:EXPO 2015 - Milano - Piazza Castello, Expo Gate.JPG
- File:Expo 2015 - Pavilions - Future Food District (17188602748).jpg
- File:Expo 2015 building in Milano.JPG
- File:Expo 2015 Milaan.JPG
- File:EXPO 2015 Milano by Taiyo Europe.JPG
- File:EXPO 2015 MILANO.jpg
- File:Expo Milano (17190166519).jpg
- File:Expo Milano Presstour (17189199700).jpg
- File:Expo2015Milano-Cardo.JPG
- File:Expo2015Milano-FFD.JPG
- File:Expo2015Milano-OpenAirTheatre.JPG
- File:Expo2015Milano-PavilionZero.jpg
- File:Expo2015Milano-StatueFerretti.jpg
- File:Fale - Milano - 14.jpg
- File:Firenze, lungarno e ponte alle grazie.JPG
- File:Florence seen from Ponte Vecchio.JPG
- File:Fontana dei Quattro Fiumi, foto di Dennis Jarvis.jpg
- File:Fontana del Moro, foto di Dennis Jarvis.jpg
- File:FontanaFiladelfia.JPG
- File:Graffito renzi-staino, chiasso cornino, firenze 01.JPG
- File:Graffito renzi-staino, chiasso cornino, firenze 02.JPG
- File:Granturco a Milano (14886353157).jpg
- File:I Expo 2015 Milan Sudan Pavillon.JPG
- File:Marmorata22.jpg
- File:Mediopadana AV.JPG
- File:Milano - Cielo sopra l'Expo.jpg
- File:Milano - Expo Gate in costruzione.JPG
- File:Milano Guastalla Velasca.jpg
- File:Phase of Nothingness, 1970.png
- File:Piazza Venezia, Rome (28358857313).jpg
- File:Piazza Venezia, Rome (28975386415).jpg
- File:Pica Ciamarra.jpg
- File:Reitspielgerät - mnolte.jpg
- File:San michele 01.jpg
- File:San michele 02.jpg
- File:San michele 03.jpg
- File:San michele 04.jpg
- File:San Michele 05.jpg
- File:San michele 06.jpg
- File:San michele 09.jpg
- File:Sasseta 013.jpg
- File:Sasseta 014.jpg
- File:Stazione Alta Velocità Mediopadana.JPG
- File:University's Palace at Catania - Cicciofarmaco.jpg
- File:Venice Biennale pavillion-Great Britain.JPG
- File:Vinci, piazza guidi 01.JPG
- File:Vinci, piazza guidi 02.JPG
- File:Vinci, piazza guido masi.JPG
ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 09:31, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Delete - I have no idea about FOP & all that - I just upload images and hope for the best really, Anyway my images (File:Piazza Venezia, Rome (28358857313).jpg and File:Piazza Venezia, Rome (28975386415).jpg) seemingly fail FOP so get rid of them, No idea about the other images so I'll leave that up to the deciding admin. –Davey2010Talk 18:26, 16 April 2017 (UTC)- Delete what? This mass deletion request is a whole non sense. There are pictures like this, this, this and others threw in with no apparent criterium. Plus the whole mass process involves photos not linked by any logical connection, it seems that the user has cherrypicked photos of Italy and proposed for the deletion. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 12:51, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
- Them all ?, Well I haven't looked at all the images which I thought I made clear above, I assumed these were all of the white building and all failed the fop, –Davey2010Talk 13:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
- I had assumed the nominator had nominated the building in Rome (IE my 2 images above) - This list contains random images so therefore this should be speedy kept (Unfortunately I'm not using the best of laptops right now and simply trusted the nominator in this case), I've asked an admin to close this, Thanks. –Davey2010Talk 22:49, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Kept: almost a trolling request. Blackcat speedy kept some files. I deleted few photos of recent and innovative buildings from EXPO '15, but for artworks in the public space we should use {{Italy-MiBAC-disclaimer}} instead of signaling them as copyviol (even after few centuries from creation!). Ruthven (msg) 15:36, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:FoP-Italy
[edit]Modern architecture and works of art retain their copyright restrictions and there is no Freedom of Panorama in Italy.
- File:Expo Milano Presstour (17189199700).jpg
- File:Expo2015Milano-PavilionZero.jpg
- File:I Expo 2015 Milan Sudan Pavillon.JPG
- File:Mediopadana AV.JPG
- File:Monumento al ten. pilota brasiliano John Richardson Cordeiro e Silva precipitato il 6 novembre 1944 nei pressi di Casoni di Livergnano - Museo Winter Line - Livergnano (BO).jpg
- File:Phase of Nothingness, 1970.png
Themightyquill (talk) 07:10, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
Kept: mainly kept, as these architectural works are not registered to the Ministry. Ruthven (msg) 12:08, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:FoP-Italy
[edit]Bridges, like other works, are subject to copyright restrictions. No Freedom of Panorama in Italy.
- Keep Considering the composition of the image I think de minimis applies in this case. The bridge just occupies a small percentage of the entire area of the photograph.—Mariordo (talk) 15:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- I have trouble accepting that. It is clearly the subject of the image. The bridge is the title of the image, and the description of the image. The image is in Category:Ponte della Costituzione. The image is used in multiple wikipedia articles about the bridge. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:14, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
- Delete --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:24, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Considering the composition of the image I think de minimis applies in this case. The bridge just occupies a small percentage of the entire area of the photograph.—Mariordo (talk) 15:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- Keep As already noted in the image De Minimis applies as nor the bridge or any building is shown in detail and cover only a small area of the entire image.Mariordo (talk) 15:29, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- Then I would suggest we crop out most or all of the bridge - then there's no issue, and it won't need to be in Category:Ponte della Costituzione. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:14, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
- Keep As already noted in the image De Minimis applies as nor the bridge or any building is shown in detail and cover only a small area of the entire image.Mariordo (talk) 15:29, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Themightyquill (talk) 14:39, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- Is this bridge registered by the Ministry as a protected work? José Luiz disc 14:43, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- in the case of images showing the entire bridge the arquitect’s (Calatrava) has the copyright, so the copyvio applies unless an authorization from Calatrava is produced.Mariordo (talk) 15:34, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- Delete --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:25, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:FoP-Italy
[edit]Public art is subject to copyright restrictions like any other art. There is no Freedom of Panorama in Italy.
Themightyquill (talk) 14:43, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Keep as already tagged in both images, de minimis applies. The area shown of the sculpture covers a relative small area of the entire image. See the examples of the Louvre Pyramid kept applying this criteria.—Mariordo (talk) 15:39, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- De minimis? The artwork is clearly the central subject of the image. It's in both titles. It's centred in both images. It's in the description of both images. And both images are in both Category:Lorenzo Quinn (the artist) and Category:57th Venice Biennale. The first image is specifically being used to illustrate en:Lorenzo Quinn on wikipedia. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:17, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
- The Louvre Pyramid exemption applies only when a larger copyright-free work is being displayed in its entirety, and this cannot be accomplished without including something copyrighted. So if either of these images was showing the entire Palazzo Morosini Sagredo and so could not avoid including the artwork, de minimis might apply. But that's clearly not the case here. These are pictures of the artwork. If anything, the Palazzo is de miminis. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:22, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Kept: kept the dm files cropped on). In any case, if the bridge is registered, it is covered by FOP, in case it isn't, FOP prevails. Ruthven (msg) 13:43, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:21st-century statues in Italy
[edit]Sorry, but these sculptures of Dante Ferretti (living person) are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
Raoli ✉ (talk) 03:07, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:38, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Vittorio Storaro
[edit]Sorry, but these installations of Vittorio Storaro (living person) are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:Golden Lion Venice Film Festival 2004 1.jpg
- File:Golden Lion Venice Film Festival 2004 2.jpg
- File:Golden Lion Venice Film Festival 2004 3.jpg
- File:Leone d'oro.jpg
Raoli ✉ (talk) 03:11, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but this sculpture by CentroPadana is too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:Lodi monumento Barbarossa.JPG
- File:Lodi statua equestre Barbarossa.JPG
- File:Statua Barbarossa Lodi.JPG
Raoli ✉ (talk) 03:14, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:48, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Bosco dei Faggi (Milan)
[edit]Sorry, but these sculptures of Christer Bording (living people) are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
Raoli ✉ (talk) 03:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:42, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:28, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Unused photographs of a user, thus out of project scope. Commons is not a personal photo album!
- File:Asadullah Haroon Mayo.jpg
- File:Asadmayo.jpg
- File:Asad Haroon.jpg
- File:M. Asad Mayo.jpg
- File:Asadullah Mayo.jpg
- File:Muhammad Asadullah.jpg
- File:Muhammad Asad Mayo.JPG
- File:Asadullah mayo.JPG
- File:M. Asad Mayo.JPG
- File:Asad Haroon Mayo.JPG
- File:Asadullah Haroon Mayo.JPG
- File:Muhammad Asadullah Mayo.JPG
—Bill william comptonTalk 05:37, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:29, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Paulodellas (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF/different cameras.
- File:Paulo Della Serra - Banda Contraste 1992.jpeg
- File:Paulo Della Serra - PMJ - 2005.jpg
- File:Bboy Gu - Gustavo Della Serra.jpg
- File:Paulo Della Serra.jpeg
- File:Paulo Della In 123 Break 2013.jpeg
- File:Gustavo Della Serra in "Moment" - Joinville Festival Dance - Brazil 2012.JPG
- File:Moment - Joinville 2012.jpg
- File:Moment - Gustavo Della Serra - Joinville 2012.jpg
- File:Moment - Gustavo Della Serra - Joinville 2012 (b).jpg
- File:Bboy Gu SAMBA.jpg
- File:Bboy Gu.png
- File:Aula de House dance no Objetivo Prof Gustavo.jpg
- File:BboyGu.jpg
- File:Bboy Gu.JPG
- File:Mastercrew 2008 013 com Gu.gif
- File:Bboy gu.jpg
- File:Bboy Rard.jpeg
- File:Bboy Weslei.jpeg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:20, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sushil231088 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
- File:03012012411 jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj.jpg
- File:R op pokij kkkkkjknkn mandu trip etc.jpg
- File:Ajuiokolo.jpg
- File:Photo0095jkbibibi.jpg
- File:Photo0094lnnknib.jpg
- File:Photo0092lnnknib.jpg
- File:Y4lnnknib.WebM
- File:Y3ygjghg.WebM
- File:Y2.WebM
- File:Y1lhlhlh.WebM
- File:X3kljjhhi.WebM
- File:X2mmm.WebM
- File:X1askk.WebM
- File:A8asdasdds.WebM
- File:A1.WebM
- File:A6lkklkjl.WebM
- File:A5asssjnkn.WebM
- File:Samarthkjnkjn.WebM
- File:Video23.WebM
- File:Phopnar village hela takkar in Burhanpur.WebM
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:23, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: by Yann Morning ☼ (talk) 12:22, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
- Files uploaded by Sushil231088 (talk · contribs)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
- File:Photo-0004This is the banana photo of burhanpur in all of my mind has one thing common for all.jpg
- File:Photo-0001This is the banana photo of burhanpur.jpg
- File:17102011001lnnk.jpg
- File:Photo-0003 (2)the hide and sike game is a good game.jpg
- File:X3The one I had always never was it and being alive with whatever is left.WebM
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:22, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 19:58, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Joanathan bessaci (talk · contribs)
[edit]Modern art. I think painter identity confirmation via Commons:OTRS is necessary.
- File:Cut outs.jpg
- File:Sans titre 1 100 x200cm.JPG
- File:Sans titre 1 65x80 cm.JPG
- File:Perso 2.jpg
- File:Projection.jpg
- File:MARYLINE T 3.jpg
- File:En attente. 2.jpg
- File:2005 LA MATURITÉ 1.JPG
- File:Descendance 1.JPG
- File:Krylon 1.JPG
- File:Sans titre 100 x200cm.JPG
- File:Sans titre 65x80 cm.JPG
- File:Perso 2 100x150cm.jpg
- File:MARYLINE T 3 100x100cm.jpg
- File:Lukas 1 100x150cm.jpg
- File:Krylon 1 100x100cm.JPG
- File:En attente 2 150x150cm.jpg
- File:2005 LA MATURITÉ 200x250cm.JPG
- File:Descendance 0 100x200cm.JPG
- File:Descendance.JPG
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:25, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Tracyekbanks (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:26, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 19:59, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Steven6191 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:27, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Anthony Garotinho Deputado Federal.jpg
- File:Anthony Garotinho foto principal.jpg
- File:Anthony Garotinho Governador do Rio de Janeiro e Deputado Federal.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:38, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:38, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rahulghose (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Arup Roy WB Minister.jpeg
- File:Konineecabanerjee.png
- File:John Abraham (actor).jpg
- File:Rahul ghose me.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:41, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:38, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Seribol seku (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
- File:Bayan-ulgii.jpg
- File:Seribol1.jpg
- File:Astana.jpg
- File:Baiterek.jpg
- File:Olgei.jpg
- File:Beijing palace.jpg
- File:Kazakhstan.jpg
- File:Mongolia.jpg
- File:Kazakh.jpg
- File:I love Astana,Kazakhstan.jpg
- File:Segii.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 20:01, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
- File:Going22.JPG
- File:Going3.JPG
- File:BaloonBaby3.jpg
- File:BaloonBaby2.jpg
- File:KidsBaloons.jpg
- File:BigLaugh.jpg
- File:BaloonBaby.JPG
- File:CuteLaugh.jpg
- File:SmileMustard.JPG
- File:ThumbSucking.JPG
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:44, 9 February 2013 (UTC) Please go ahead and delete.The error noted down and would be acting as per the rules. Thanks.--Gutam2000 (talk) 08:15, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:38, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
out of scope - promotional images/logos
INeverCry 21:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
User talk:INeverCry please delete the Images/Logos. --112.133.202.166 06:30, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Orphaned picture of user, not in scope of the project. User [commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AMartin_H.&diff=90232180&oldid=89900651 abused] project as a filehost for media files for her own website.
Martin H. (talk) 18:28, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 20:05, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Abhisheksinglastar (talk · contribs)
[edit]Not educationally useful.
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (30).JPG
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (29).JPG
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (28).JPG
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (27).JPG
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (26).JPG
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (25).JPG
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (22).JPG
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (23).JPG
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (21).JPG
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (17).JPG
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (9).JPG
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (8).JPG
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (2).jpg
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (3).jpg
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (6).jpg
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR 2.jpg
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (24).JPG
- File:ABHISHEK SINGLA STAR (7).JPG
Harsh 2580 (talk) 20:30, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Delete. Self-portraits of non-notable person. No realistic educational application. Rrburke (talk) 20:59, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:41, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Ruhe1986 April 2011 uploads traceable to other sources
[edit]- File:Altonil555.jpg
- File:Cartervilledowntown1.jpg
- File:Cfiles25341.jpg
- File:Compositebelleville.JPG
- File:D299ebc1-311b-47dc-9998-efcae039e9d5.jpg
- File:Downtown East St. Louis, Illinois.jpg
- File:Mcleansboro.JPG
- File:Mt vernonil12.jpg
- File:Viennail11.jpg
COM:COPYVIO/COM:DW: Derivative of photos traceable to various unlicensed sources, but unsourced and instead labeled as "own work" by uploader Ruhe1986 (talk · contribs). --Closeapple (talk) 23:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per own nomation: All of these are files uploaded in a row in April 2011 by Ruhe1986, and tagged as "own work" with no source or other credit and no evidence of any license from the photographer/copyright holder. This nomination covers the cases where I have found what appear to be the original sources. I have brought this to deletion discussion instead of speedy in case Ruhe1986 (talk · contribs) can provide evidence of the original photographers giving permission for their photographs to be uploaded, but I doubt it will happen. The list:
- File:Altonil555.jpg: poorly-compressed crop of PC258525: Alton, Illinois from carpunder on Flickr; original photo licensed as CC-BY-NC-2.0 (not enough on Commons)
- File:Cartervilledowntown1.jpg: Cropped and brightened version of cfiles30053.jpg (2007-04-07) via Carterville, IL : down town Carterville, "Picture by (kept private)", submitted on 2007-04-07. No license on original picture or in its EXIF.
- File:Cfiles25341.jpg: Cropped and color-adjusted version of cfiles25341.jpg via Collinsville, IL : Old Miner's Theater, Picture by John Dwayne Fitch, submitted on 2006-12-18. No license on original.
- File:Compositebelleville.JPG: poorly-compressed montage of two photos. Top: "St. Clair County Courthouse (Belleville, Illinois) - NE Entrance" from Flickr, labeled as taken 2010-09-21 by Dan Schattnik of Chesterfield, Missouri and tagged as "All Rights Reserved". Bottom: Source unclear; former Belleville post office, now Belleville Public Schools District #118 offices.
- File:D299ebc1-311b-47dc-9998-efcae039e9d5.jpg: Reduced copy of [2] (same file name, larger resolution, with EXIF retained), dated 2008-09-19 in EXIF, via Ratcliff Inn - Carmi, IL - Abraham Lincoln on Waymarking.com, labeled "Posted by: Groundspeak Premium Member YoSam." and "Published By: Groundspeak Premium Member Corp Of Discovery"; page marked "Copyright (c) 2013 Groundspeak, Inc. All Rights Reserved."
- File:Downtown East St. Louis, Illinois.jpg: Cropped and brightened version of 2957679_orig.jpg (uploaded no later than 2010-11-13 based on web server date) via "East St. Louis: Bring it Back to Life" from the website Illinois in Focus: A Photographic Tour of the Land of Lincoln, so presumably the work of Jesse Derber and Lyndsey Derber. Bottom of webpage says "All images contained on this site, unless otherwise stated, are the property of Illinois in Focus and may not be reused without permission."
- File:Mcleansboro.JPG: Poorly brightened and recompressed version of JPG with EXIF still intact, dated 2009-04-11 in EXIF, via this or Aaron G. Cloud House - McLeansboro, Illinois - Victorian Houses on Waymarking.com, labeled "Posted by: Groundspeak Charter Member BruceS" and "Published By: Groundspeak Premium Member Smiling Little Perch". Page marked "Copyright (c) 2013 Groundspeak, Inc. All Rights Reserved."
- File:Mt vernonil12.jpg: Cropped and color-adjusted version of cfiles43912.jpg via Mount Vernon, IL : Downtown Mt. Vernon from West Broadway, "Picture by Gary Southerd", submitted on 2008-04-13. No license on original.
- File:Viennail11.jpg: Reduced copy of Johnson County Courthouse (Vienna, Illinois) by courthouselover on Flickr, marked "All Rights Reserved"
See Commons:Deletion requests/Ruhe1986 April 2011 uploads untraced to other sources for the ones I couldn't track down. --Closeapple (talk) 23:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Ruhe1986 April 2011 uploads untraced to other sources
[edit]COM:COPYVIO/COM:DW: Likely derivatives of various unlicensed sources, but uncredited and instead labeled as "own work" by uploader Ruhe1986 like other files. --Closeapple (talk) 23:53, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per own nomination: These files all have odd resolutions and have had their color balance messed with in the same way, and were mixed in with the files uploaded on the same day and nominated as Commons:Deletion requests/Ruhe1986 April 2011 uploads traceable to other sources. Considering that set of files, this set is likely to be uncredited, unlicensed works by other photographers as well:
- File:Belleville downtown.jpg: EXIF stripped
- File:First Baptist Church, Carrier Mills, IL.jpg: EXIF stripped; original filename at upload was File:230523 1338389036865 1745324058 581024 3268550 n.jpg, as if it came from an image hosting site
- File:Jm18078.JPG: odd resolution depite being taken with a Canon PowerShot A20 on 2002-09-27
Deleted: INeverCry 00:44, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
de minimis? Morning ☼ (talk) 00:57, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Per uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 13:52, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Upon enlarging the file, we can see this is not true SVG. One exists at File:County Flag of Wiltshire.svg. Fry1989 eh? 03:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Per uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 13:53, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Delete copy. Xiuhtecuhtli (talk) 04:23, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Per uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 13:53, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
This image does not have a source for where this logo comes from. The source should also be from the All India Football Federation who run the 2nd Division in India and again, the user does not say that in his description. Arsenalkid700 (talk) 22:48, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Per uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 13:53, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but these stations and objects are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:Dante stazione.jpg of Gae Aulenti (died in 2012) and Michelangelo Pistoletto (living person)
- File:Metroaugusto.jpg of Studio Protec
- File:Metrotoledo.jpg (the best impressive station of Europe) of Óscar Tusquets (living person)
- File:Piazza dante, metropolitana.jpg of Gae Aulenti (died in 2012) and Michelangelo Pistoletto (living person)
- File:Stazione di Lala.jpg of Studio Protec
- File:Stazione Materdei.jpg of Alessandro Mendini (living person)
Raoli ✉ (talk) 01:07, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete but keep these not original pictures: File:Stazione di Lala.jpg and File:Metroaugusto.jpg.--Dega180 (talk) 10:41, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Per uncontested DR for most. MBisanz talk 13:53, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by KostastozisT (talk · contribs)
[edit]Private image collection. Not realistically useful for educational purposes and therefore outside of Commons' project scope.
- File:Kostastozis-126.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-15.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-124.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-123.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-122.jpg
- File:Kostastozis111.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-2013.jpg
- File:Kostastoziss.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-k.......t.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-k..t.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-k.tt.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-k.t.jpg
- File:Kostastozis AGIOGRAFOS.jpg
- File:Kostas tozis o pinakas mou.jpg
- File:Alfa kai omega nohma zohs.JPG
- File:K.t.jpg
- File:Kostas.jpg
- File:Kostastoz.jpg
- File:Kostastozi.jpg
- File:Kostastozis.grr.jpg
- File:Kostas tozisT oi pinakes mou.jpg
- File:Kostas tozisT h eikona mou.jpg
- File:Kostas tozisT o stoixos mou.jpg
- File:Kostas tozis h eikona mou.jpg
—LX (talk, contribs) 10:13, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- Files uploaded by KostastozisT (talk · contribs)
As discussed at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Files recreated outside of process?, the user continues to upload out-of-scope files and recreating previously deleted out-of-scope content. Commons:What Commons is not#Commons is not your personal free web.
- File:Kostastozis-1.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-.jpg
- File:Kostastozis.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-14.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-10.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-9.jpg
—LX (talk, contribs) 07:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
- All deleted except one, which might be in scope. Yann (talk) 12:54, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
The last remaining image (File:Kostastozis-10.jpg) may be a copyvio. This high-res copy shows more inscriptions on the painting in the bottom left corner including a date of 1995. INeverCry 01:18, 27 February 2013 (UTC)Also, the name given in the inscription begins with epsilon rather than kappa, so it doesn't match the uploader's name.INeverCry 01:48, 27 February 2013 (UTC)- Looking at this again, I guess these are 2 different copies of an old icon. File:Kostastozis-10.jpg seems to say "65" in the inscription which I would take to mean it was painted in 1965, as it looks a bit too bright and new to be 1865. I don't know if I buy the "own work" claim, but if it's a plain copy of a pd icon, or is old enough to be pd itself, it might be keepable. I think it'd be in scope as a religious icon. INeverCry 02:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: except one, as above. Yann (talk) 06:41, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by KostastozisT (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, unused personal images.
- File:Kooo.tooo.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-887788.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-6-666.jpg
- File:Kostas tozis-3350.png
- File:Kostastozis--333.png
- File:Kostastozis-235.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-6.jpg
- File:Kostastozis-5.jpg
- File:Kostastozis111 004.JPG
- File:Kostastozis111 003.JPG
- File:Kostastozis2.jpg
- File:Kostastozis1.jpg
Jespinos (talk) 20:34, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
Delete per nom and overly self-promotional Rybec (talk) 02:10, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Delete yet again of course. No different from the other two times, and the user remains unwilling or unable to respond to communication attempts. How many times are we going to have to do this before the uploader is blocked? —LX (talk, contribs) 16:09, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:48, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by KostastozisT (talk · contribs) and sockpuppet Kostastozis (talk · contribs)
[edit]Yet again, out-of-scope images with no educational purpose. While the images are technically in use on en:User:Kostastozis, en:User:KostastozisT and en:User:Kostastozi, in my opinion, this is not legitimately in use as intended by {{User page image}}, as the user page appears to be purely self-promotional and the user is not there to participate in the project.
- File:Kostas tozisss.jpg
- File:Kostastozis7.jpg
- File:Παρουσίαση χωρίς τίτλο---ko.....t (1).jpg
- File:Kostas.tozis (2).jpg
- File:Kostas.tozis.jpg
- File:Kostas tozis.jpg
- File:Kostastozisss.jpg
- File:Kostas tozis.gr.jpg
- File:Kostastozis.gr.jpg
- File:Kostastozis..jpg
—LX (talk, contribs) 17:04, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:33, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but this object of Annet van Egmond (living person) is too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome). Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:35, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Neutral see this similar discussion.--Dega180 (talk) 10:31, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Delete I changed my opinion about this deletion request, in the italian law (Legge 22 aprile 1941 n. 633 art.2 comma 10) is written:
In particolare sono comprese nella protezione:
...
10) Le opere del disegno industriale che presentino di per sé carattere creativo e valore artistico.
in English:
In particular are included in the protection:
...
10) Works of industrial design that presents themselves creative character and artistic value
so this object whit an evident creative character is protected by copyright and we can't freely copy it as stated in CC BY-SA--dega180 (talk) 20:34, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 22:26, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 1Veertje as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Derivative work. Permission section translates as "I hereby authorize Dr. Jörg Weule permission to publish this picture. Myriam Thyes (in the source file, 14:18, 10 June 2011 (UTC))" I think OTRS would be helpful. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:34, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Ah, yes, I see. That this account is hold by Myriam Thyes should be verified by the OTRS. See Commons:UPOLICY#Famous_people --Vera (talk) 23:06, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 22:27, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
تصوير غير مجاز مي باشد. Asemaniran (talk) 09:24, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
تصوير شخص به صورت غير مجاز انتشار يافته است. Asemaniran (talk) 10:00, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 22:27, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Imagery Póllo
[edit]Covers albums and singles. --Pablodiego15 (talk) 07:05, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
The user used the link to this image: File:Cabal.jpg to create others, as if it were uploads of Sergio Savarese, that is disabled.
This includes: File:Pollo banda.jpg, File:Mr. Gângster (cantor).jpg, File:Murilo lages.jpg, File:Mc guime.jpg, File:Hungria cantor.jpg and File:Big Ralf rapper.jpg, the image File:F7.jpg accepted by pelo user Lobo, does not match the image on Flickr. see Pablodiego15 (talk) 07:20, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Now browsing, the image was not verified by the user Lobo! see Pablodiego15 (talk) 07:22, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete all. Most sources of these images (from Flickr) are inactive and so we can not confirm the license. The uploader (User:Palhaço) of some of the images is doubtful and faked some licenses (see this and this). Érico Wouters msg 04:47, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 22:27, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but these objects of Paola Navone (living person) are too recent (2012) and Italy has no FOP exemption (for interior and exterior).
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:" 12 - ITALY - Milan Design Week (Fuorisalone) The Secret Garden by Paola Navone and Barovier & Toso 01.JPG
- File:" 12 - ITALY - Milan Design Week (Fuorisalone) The Secret Garden by Paola Navone and Barovier & Toso 03.JPG
- File:" 12 - ITALY - Milan Design Week (Fuorisalone) The Secret Garden by Paola Navone and Barovier & Toso 04.JPG
- File:" 12 - ITALY - Milan Design Week (Fuorisalone) The Secret Garden by Paola Navone and Barovier & Toso 05.JPG
- File:" 12 - ITALY - Milan Design Week (Fuorisalone) The Secret Garden by Paola Navone and Barovier & Toso 07.JPG
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:39, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:42, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep absurd and logical with the cases discussed above: in this selections (and category) are present: object (lamps) of industrial production and mass user (glass lamp and plastic lamps) on pieces of log (absurd and logical with the cases discussed above). In the other image are present a temporary allestiment by Paola Navone, this artist is on FOP Archive universally, and the allestiment has already been removed. The case FOP discuss about Auditorium Parco della Musica is no pertinent for this case. (a lamp, a car, a pen are not works of art)--Pava (talk) 16:49, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- All these file are works of art and are protected by the international copyright. It's clear. For the FoP there is no diference among an objects, a sculpture or a building: all pics are in a public place or in public interior but they had not to publish/upload on Wikimedia Commons for the italian law (via lex loci originis and lex loci protectionis). Raoli ✉ (talk) 04:24, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- In this photo are present temporary allestiment with object for mass use: intended for an usage mass, everyday objects and furniture (lamps, chandeliers), the European Union is not expected to be restrictions apply to the works of art to mass-produced objects and destined for industrial use. The EU has warned Italy even if FLOS-SEMERARO for having protected the Arco lamp by the decay of rights. This is not a work of art, the only coverage that protects an object of industrial design are the intellectual property rights of the patent. You are not only misinterpreting a law of 1941, which does not explain well what it's about, but you are also breaking a European law today.--Pava (talk) 12:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- They are works of art. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:10, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- no, presenting and displaying the "2012 production catalog" of CITCO and BAROVIER & TOSO two Italian companies. here is the difference between what you say and what I say, this is something done during the furniture fair where companies present their customers with products production. What do you think of a company that sells marble and chandeliers spends millions of money in a trade fair to make art? Since when fairs are museums of contemporary art? This is no art, this is industrial production; and beyond all this, this message has nothing to do with the discussion made for the Parco della Musica --Pava (talk) 22:12, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Do you seem these images depict an object in production on industrial scale? Do not waste any more time. Thanks --Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:05, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- yes, they are chandeliers in the prefabricated, cabbage know what I'm talking about, I worked on that project was me. They are glass chandeliers of Barovier & Toso, is the production company in 2012 (portfolio product, production of 2012), I'm not wasting my time I'm making it clear what it is. the B & T produces chandeliers and showcases its products to customers. the B & T sells a glass lamp shaped like a man, I put it on a piece of wood, is not art, it is only presenting his product that sells. What's hard to understand? why do you have to say lies, why do you think I should go wrong if you know what I'm talking about? those pictures I made myself, the design of that 'exhibition I attended too.--Pava (talk) 23:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Do you seem these images depict an object in production on industrial scale? Do not waste any more time. Thanks --Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:05, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- no, presenting and displaying the "2012 production catalog" of CITCO and BAROVIER & TOSO two Italian companies. here is the difference between what you say and what I say, this is something done during the furniture fair where companies present their customers with products production. What do you think of a company that sells marble and chandeliers spends millions of money in a trade fair to make art? Since when fairs are museums of contemporary art? This is no art, this is industrial production; and beyond all this, this message has nothing to do with the discussion made for the Parco della Musica --Pava (talk) 22:12, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Delete per nom.--FAEP (talk) 20:02, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 08:28, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but this building of Zaha Hadid (living person) is too recent (2012) and Italy has no FOP exemption (for interior and exterior).
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:" 12 - ITALY - Milan Design Week (Fuorisalone) The Secret Garden by CITCO and Zaha Hadid 02.JPG
- File:" 12 - ITALY - Milan Design Week (Fuorisalone) The Secret Garden by CITCO and Zaha Hadid 04.JPG
- File:" 12 - ITALY - Milan Design Week (Fuorisalone) The Secret Garden by CITCO and Zaha Hadid 05.JPG
- File:" 12 - ITALY - Milan Design Week (Fuorisalone) The Secret Garden by CITCO and Zaha Hadid 06.JPG
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:44, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep industrial design and urban design is no pertinent with architecture case and FOP discussions: this is a temporary allestiment by Zaha Hadid, Zaha Hadid have your name on free FOP archive architects. The allestiment now is expired and isn't architecture. --Pava (talk) 16:28, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- A fortiori, they should be deleted! --Raoli ✉ (talk) 04:39, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- Maybe what I mean bad because of my poor English: Zaha Hadid is in favor of the FOP, there are two strands of architects, who enters his works in FOP and who is not universal, Calatrava is not in free FOP and then his works are deleted, Zaha Hadid has chosen instead to you. That said, in these photos are also included in the deletion, not just those that show the construction, but also those that show a marble table made from CITCO whose author is anonymous. You understand that we are going to abuse the removal tool? because we are not doing selection? if you want to make this campaign, nobody forces you, or do careful or do not do. You can not delete, a coat, a staircase or a forum on a field of grass or a piece of stone just because they are in a category that relates to an object that you think is if NO FOP. Which among other things repeat, in this case we did not own.
- You're saying that Zaha Hadid is in favor of FOP: source? --Jaqen (talk) 14:07, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- no, is different, it is not in the list NO FOP, a list of FOP free no exist. --Pava (talk) 14:12, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- So, what is this "NO FOP" list you are talking about? --Jaqen (talk) 15:54, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- for me it is very difficult to retrieve it, especially it is almost impossible to retrieve it online for a handy reference, (but already on wikimedia commons is visible that the artist is not in this case: [3]) But it should be those who dispute that shows me that Zaha Hadid is in the list, not that i support that is not present. It 's the proof that Zaha Hadid is in NO FOP missing. I know that Zaha Hadid is in FOP for the simple reason that i have participated in the creation of this work of the "Secret Garden", and in the documentation on construction site to give us access restrictions,Paola Navone that Zaha Hadid no had limitations photo sharing or video / audio of that work. for both visitors and organizers. The walkway and the information box [4] [5] of the stand of the "Secret Garden" were even anonymous (they are made by a firm of architects in Milan but bear no signature. When it comes to architects and artists who have a limitation in the reproduction, or material that can not be shared or photograph, the records are completely different, and certainly would not let me take pictures to the construction site. [6] and File:" 12 - ITALY - Milan Design Week (Fuorisalone) The Secret Garden by CITCO and Zaha Hadid (under construction 02.JPG and I assure you that I have not climbed gates or evaded surveillance to take pictures, be granted relief operation authorized site.--Pava (talk) 17:01, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- However there is a copyright for these images. Also Renzo Piano said me that they don't know what it be no-fop or fop but it is not a valid reason to keep files in copyright (in Italy). --Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:22, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- But it just so happens that this case of Barovier & Toso and CITCO not covered in the discussion agreed to the concert venue, this is something else and FOP is not the case for the reasons expressed here Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Barovier_&_Toso_with_Paola_Navone_for_The_Secret_Garden also if a work is in Free FOP by the same architect Italian law adapts to the freedom of the architect, is that if I put a photo in PD Italian law the applicable limitations, that is a law made for works of art at that time were not covered by any law, but by the works already covered by rights, especially if the licenses are decided by who is responsible (owner or designer or client) the law adjusts to it --Pava (talk) 22:34, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Need however an authorization via OTRS to verify that the author agrees with what you're saying. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:16, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- regardless of authorization by Zaha Hadid this temporary exhibition is not the case discussed for the park's music and objects of industrial production are not considered works of art (see case FLOS-SEMERARO) you do not have consent to continue in this cancellation, I'm sorry, he's talking about here Commons:Bar_italiano#Campagna_di_cancellazione_per_il_NO-FOP_Italy_.28_.C3.A8_fatta_molto_male.29 --Pava (talk) 23:45, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Need however an authorization via OTRS to verify that the author agrees with what you're saying. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:16, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Delete per nom.--FAEP (talk) 20:01, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Per discussion. SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 08:22, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but this building of Michele De Lucchi (living person) is too recent (2012) and Italy has no FOP exemption (for interior and exterior).
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:" 12 - ITALY - Triennale Design Museum - Milan Design Week 2012 (fuorisalone) Triennale di Milano 2.JPG
- File:" 12 - ITALY - Triennale Design Museum - Milan Design Week 2012 (fuorisalone) Triennale di Milano.JPG
of Joe di De Pas D'Urbino e Lomazzi (living people)
- File:"12 - ITALY - Triennale di Milano - Fuorisalone 2012 ( Milan design week ) - Sciangai di De Pas D'Urbino e Lomazzi - Zanotta - Italia - 1973.JPG
- File:"12 - ITALY - Triennale di Milano - Fuorisalone 2012 ( Milan Design Week) - Joe di De Pas D'Urbino e Lomazzi - Poltronova - Italia - 1971 -.JPG
- File:"12 - ITALY - Triennale di Milano - Fuorisalone 2012 ( Milan Design Week) - Joe di De Pas D'Urbino e Lomazzi - Poltronova - Italia - 1971.JPG
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:41, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:54, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep -.- industrial desing (object for mass users) is no pertinent with FOP case, we can't unite carrots and potatoes, then all the cars photographed in Italy has to be canceled for FOP --Pava (talk) 16:38, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Industrial design is not applicable for the italian law, only for the US law and this pics don't show objects for mass users but works of art. You can upload pictures of cars but the design of cars and these works of art are different. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 04:29, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- Raoli, in this picture are present object (for every day user) donated by un'utilizzatore or a company to be shown to the people, not a museum or art for their own sake, is industrial production, you can not tell me that I can not photograph a pack of gum just because someone has designed and is not dead for 70 years, this law does not say, the law speaks of ART--Pava (talk) 12:50, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- Which is the function of these installations or objects? Show works of art. --Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:09, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- no, this is no art, this is presentations of product design during a trade fair, companies present our product to customers, portfolio of industrial products, no art please look here:Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Barovier_&_Toso_with_Paola_Navone_for_The_Secret_Garden -Pava (talk) 22:37, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- In any case they are works of art. They depict the creativity of the author. I'm sorry. Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- no Raoli, this is your opinion and your interpretation, you do not consent to continue in this cancellation, I'm sorry, he's talking about here Commons:Bar_italiano#Campagna_di_cancellazione_per_il_NO-FOP_Italy_.28_.C3.A8_fatta_molto_male.29 --Pava (talk) 23:43, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- In any case they are works of art. They depict the creativity of the author. I'm sorry. Raoli ✉ (talk) 23:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- no, this is no art, this is presentations of product design during a trade fair, companies present our product to customers, portfolio of industrial products, no art please look here:Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Barovier_&_Toso_with_Paola_Navone_for_The_Secret_Garden -Pava (talk) 22:37, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Delete per nom.--FAEP (talk) 20:00, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Inconsistent request SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 08:12, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Maybe a copyright violation High Contrast (talk) 11:32, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
This photo is an official photo of the artist.User:Annapaolamartin
Thanks for your reply. The same image appears here. Can you upload it with a higher resolution? --High Contrast (talk) 11:49, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
I really don't like that my pics are uploaded in high resolution. People can use them in some different ways... I'll contact Rockit (someone from the press office maybe uploaded an high resolution pic without my permission). This is one of my pictures, my name is Annapaola Martin, my facebook official fan page is here http://www.facebook.com/annapaolamartin. Here you can find my pics. If you like to contact me directly my email is annapaola.martin@gmail.com. I don't know what else I have to do to explain that pic is mine and is used by the artist as an official one. Thank you. User:Annapaolamartin
Deleted: FASTILY 21:33, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but these objects are too recent (2012) and Italy has no FOP exemption (for interior and exterior).
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
- File:" 12 Milan Design Week (Fuorisalone) Brera district 08.JPG
- File:" 12 Milan Design Week (Fuorisalone) Brera district 09.JPG
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:37, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete--Dega180 (talk) 10:43, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep temporary urban design, object (seats) and light are industrial object for mass user, so the FOP is no pertient. This urban allestiment don't have a sing, nothing specific person is the author of this object --Pava (talk) 16:30, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- You have said "temporary urban design"! A fortiori, they should be deleted. No-FoP do not permit to publish/upload images of works of art/architecture. It's clear these images depict artworks and not industrial objects for mass user. Raoli ✉ (talk) 04:38, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Delete per nom.--FAEP (talk) 20:04, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Kept: No longer existent work SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 09:31, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Milano Cadorna train station
[edit]Sorry, but this building of Gae Aulenti (died 1 November 2012) ise too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
File:9427 - Milano - Stazione Cadorna Nord - Foto Giovanni Dall'Orto, 13-Oct-2007.jpgFile:IMG 6471 - Milano - Stazione Nord Cadorna - Foto Giovanni Dall'Orto - 3-March-2007.jpgFile:IMG 7502 - MI - Stazione Cadorna FN - Foto Giovanni Dall'Orto 31-Mar-2007.jpg- File:IMG 7503 - MI - Stazione Cadorna FN - Foto Giovanni Dall'Orto 31-Mar-2007.jpg
- File:Milano Stazione Cadorna facciata.jpg
- File:MilanoStazioneCadornaMalpensaExpressNotte.jpg
File:Staz Milano Cadorna.jpg
Raoli ✉ (talk) 01:04, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete but Keep these not original pictures: File:9427 - Milano - Stazione Cadorna Nord - Foto Giovanni Dall'Orto, 13-Oct-2007.jpg and File:IMG 6471 - Milano - Stazione Nord Cadorna - Foto Giovanni Dall'Orto - 3-March-2007.jpg.--Dega180 (talk) 10:48, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Wrong. The facade and the outdoor are by Gae Aulenti (in fact I posted no images from them), but the interior dates to 1945 and has no architectural value whereas the station itself and the rails part date to 1879. Do delete the images representing the part refurbished by Aulenti, but keep the images showing the part which was NOT built by her indisturbed, please. (I just created a sub-category for the facade alone so to prevent further confusion in the future. The image from the postcard predates Ms Aulenti's revamping and should therefore be kept. --User:G.dallorto (talk) 12:31, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks --Raoli ✉ (talk) 04:43, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep As told by user G.dallorto, Gae Aulenti designed only the new facade.--Friedrichstrasse (talk) 14:37, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Per discussion. The rest is either DM or below originality SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 09:34, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Museo station (Naples metro)
[edit]Sorry, but these stations and objects are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption.
Delete per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Auditorium Parco della Musica (Rome).
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:03, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete but Keep this underground station.--Dega180 (talk) 10:50, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep File:MetroNapoli Linea 1.JPG, it's a normal underground station without special features, like thousands of other--Yoggysot (talk) 15:31, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
- File:061214 027 Metro arte.jpg could be kept as PD-old unless the Ercole Farnese is a designated cultural heritage item. The statue in the station is a copy of the ancient statue. The interior of the station shown in this photo seems de minimis. This might be deleted as redundant to the photos of the ancient one. Rybec (talk) 06:49, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Nothing copyrightable SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 09:36, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Museo station (Naples metro)
[edit]The statue as a 3D-object may be old enough to be PD, but the printed photographs on the wall (2D-work) is still copyrightable.
--Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 01:31, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:04, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Files in Category:Venice Biennale
[edit]Sorry, but these objects are too recent and Italy has no FOP exemption (for interior and exterior). All these objects and installations were considered works of art.
- File:' 11 - ITALY - Biennale d'arte moderna di Venezia ( Venice Modern Art ).JPG Keep a building of which we see only the window and ventilation pipes, and a bamboo pole are covered in case you think FOP? if we want to make this campaign Cancellation let's let's done well or not, you can not do one lot and delete all, it is an abuse.--Pava (talk) 17:02, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- File:1999land(e)scape1.jpg
- File:9th Venice Architecture Biennale.jpg
- File:Balazs kicsiny-pump room.jpg
- File:Biennale d'arte 2009.jpg
- File:Biennale di Venezia 1995 Japanese Pavilion.jpg
- File:Biennale di Venezia 2009 Caféteria by Tobias Rehberger.jpg
- File:Biennale di Venezia 2009 Danish&Nordic Pavilion.jpg
- File:Biennale Venezia Immagine&Poesia.jpg Keep I am the author of these art works uploaded with attribution- ShareAlike 3.0. So where is the problem ?--Angler45 (talk) 14:02, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- File:CityZen Garden.png
- File:Detail de Fray Foam Home (Venise)-2.jpg
- File:Detail de Fray Foam Home (Venise).jpg
- File:LiamGillickB 72dpi.jpg
- File:Modesto Ciruelos. Pintura, 1950.Óleo sobre lienzo de 54 x 66 cm. Presente en la XXVIII Bienal de Venecia de 1956..jpg
- File:Occhiuto BiennaleVenezia.jpg
- File:Oil Isa Genzken.jpg
- File:Pilastro cavo per Stuttgart (Venezia 2004).jpg
- File:Sara Ramo 53rd Venice Biennale.jpg
- File:Venezia - Biennale d'arte 2003 - 01.JPG
- File:Venezia - Biennale d'arte 2007 - 01.JPG
- File:Venezia - Biennale d'arte 2007 - 02.JPG
- File:Venezia - Biennale d'arte 2007 - 03.JPG
- File:Venezia - Biennale d'arte 2009 - 01.JPG
- File:Venezia - Biennale d'arte 2009 - 07.jpg
- File:Venezia - Biennale d'arte 2009 - 13.jpg
- File:William Forsythe 53rd Venice Biennale.jpg
Raoli ✉ (talk) 02:49, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Delete I uploaded two of those photos from Flikr, but it didn't occur me that being recent works of art they could be violating copyright. Even if there was FOP in Italy, I guess that probably they would still infringe the copyright of the artists. --Stegop (talk) 03:19, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete thanks to Stegop.--Dega180 (talk) 10:58, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Keep Where are the differences to the other pics in Category:Venice Biennale? Why not delete the whole category. Or - why not delete ALL photos taken in Italy?! All the buildings, all the landscapes, all the works of art... In my opinion this is vandalism! Ciao, -AM (talk) 17:33, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Keep I agree with what User AM says--Aeron10 (talk) 09:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
Keep How many images/photos taken in Italy will you have to delete if the reason is "no FOP exemption" ? Too much rigour damages WP --Alessandroga80 (talk) 18:38, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Delete per nom.--FAEP (talk) 19:59, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. Wherever kept is about DM or far below threshold of originality SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 11:31, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
per image description on Flickr: Photography by #shotbydrew www.shotbydrew.com/. No permission Morning ☼ (talk) 01:06, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
The uploader of the flickr image has put it under the license that it can be adapted or transmitted freely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Captainmad (talk • contribs)
- Delete per nom. Clearly Flickr washing. Nymf (talk) 10:14, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- Also see my rationale regarding this at Commons:Deletion requests/File:RickRossToronto.jpg. Nymf (talk) 19:22, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 01:46, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Copyvio: The owner states this is not the original map of 1820, but a more recent digitized and improved version which remains in copyright. "The version currently uploaded on Wikicommons is the one BGS has spent significant time and effort to modify, by digitally scanning the original, using geological experience and knowledge to join the individual sheets together and colour match the original sheets to create a single map sheet. The scale of the original map has also been reduced to half the scale (ten miles to the inch). The British Geological Survey therefore holds a new copyright in this version of the artistic work under s.4 Copyright Designs & Patent Act 1988 (CDPA 1988). It came about due to the significant modifications and improvements made to the original which required significant labour and specialist skill. This is a map which is wholly owned by the British Geological Survey (BGS) and ownership is still in copyright, more details can be found below. As such BGS does not authorised this artistic work to be uploaded on to Wikicommons and placed within the public domain."See ticket:2012092610011061 Geoff Who, me? 01:50, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Delete - Apologies, I had assumed this was an unmodified original 1820 version. If it has indeed been changed in scale and undertaken the above modifications then it would appear to meet the threshold of originality. This image is replaceable by almost equivalent alternatives anyway (1, 2) - Dumelow (talk) 08:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Comment: While the modifications do not meet the threshold of originality in my opinion, the UK "sweat of the brow" doctrine would probably cover that. I have found two replacements of the same map without modifications by the British Geological Survey. Resolution is not as good as the one in the deletion request here.
- Perhaps the British Geological Survey could supply us with the public domain fragments of the map and we could stitch them ourself? I think it would be worthwhile asking. Amada44 talk to me 09:05, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Comment The communication is actually at Ticket:2013020810004711. VernoWhitney (talk) 03:52, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 01:46, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
File:Turk official teasing Armenian starved children by showing bread, 1915 (Collection of St. Lazar Mkhitarian Congregation).jpg
[edit]Apparently a falsified image. E4024 on Wikipedia listed this at Miscellany for Deletion by mistake with a rationale of "Falsified pic. See the French and Turkish texts in the TP of the file." TenPoundHammer (talk) 02:37, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep We've discussed this picture here. The picture was published in 1919 and became public domain. I think that adding {{Fact disputed}} is enough.Takabeg (talk) 03:19, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep same opinion. Sardur (talk) 22:02, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep See above. --Yerevanci (talk) 00:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep per Takabeg Darkness Shines (talk) 22:18, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep per Takabeg. I would also like to add that the "experts" who analyzed the photographed and deemed in fake were from and worked out of Ankara, Turkey. The capital of Armenian Genocide denial. In Turkey, genocide denial is an industry. It is also a state policy of primary importance. The National Security Council, Turkey’s highest constitutional authority, established in 2001 a Coordinating Committee for the Fight Against Baseless Claims of Genocide. All of the important ministries, including the Armed Forces, are represented on this committee, which is chaired by the vice prime minister. We must realize that you aren’t just confronting a simple “denial,” but you’re up against a “denialist regime.” Proudbolsahye (talk) 20:26, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Île flottante (talk) 14:47, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
- Delete The picture is falsified and it is proven by a historian. You can not discredit Jeremy Salt just by asserting he is paid by Turks or whatever. You don't need to be specificaly an epert on armenian genocide to study and dig up things. That seems to be a fake consensus of a bunch of "friends" or people clearly POV pushing. --LosPollosHermanos (talk) 18:59, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Please remain civil.
- Fake or not, it doesn't matter: there are enough references on this picture, which could be used for an article (autonomous or not), and the picture would perfectly illustrate that.
- Sardur (talk) 21:13, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep I manipulate images all day everyday (see my uploads, plenty of fakes there). I've magnified and examined this image and find no signs of image manipulation at all. I've checked the sources given and they are more than satisfactory for the name and description of the image. Penyulap ☏ 17:40, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
File:Turk official teasing Armenian starved children by showing bread, 1915 (Collection of St. Lazar Mkhitarian Congregation).jpg
[edit]The picture is fake, and the fact that it is fake is accepted by both Turkish and Armenian sides. Please see http://groong.usc.edu/orig/ak-20100222.html and http://armenians-1915.blogspot.com/2010/01/2999-forging-past-oup-and-armenian.html. I see no reason why a proven forgery should be kept here. Wikipedia is about spreading knowledge, and not falsifications. Grandmaster 21:29, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Per last DR and this file is in use in pt:Genocídio armênio and sv:Hungersnöd. Even if this image is a manipulated and\or faked image, it was first publish in 1919 and so it has a long use as a image of the armenian genocide. Be it being a fake, it still shows a part of it, the manipulation on both sides, on one those that use fake material, knowingly or not, and those that claim that if one is fake them all materials are fake, in a kind of historical denial disguised as historical "revisionism". Tm (talk) 22:11, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
- From what I see, the file is used in those 2 articles not to illustrate the forgery, but to present the picture as a true event. Is that acceptable for any serious encyclopedia? --Grandmaster 22:23, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
- Comment This mage is contended to be a forgery of an real genocide, not a fake image proved beyond a shadow of a doubt of an fake genocide. It shows one part of this genocide, the forgeries of both sides, at least, or if is true one episode of this genocide. Tm (talk) 22:36, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
- I don't really understand your point about "both sides". What does this one has to do with both sides? We are discussing a particular fake image, a collage, made very primitively out of fragments of several images. That it is a fake is quite clear, there could be no reasonable doubt about it, and both sides agree that it is fake. The question here is, what is the practical use of this picture in Wikipedia articles? So far I can only see that a proven forgery is presented in some articles as a true image, and that is not what Wikipedia stands for. I would understand if the image was used as an illustration in an article about image manipulation, but I don't see that happening. --Grandmaster 22:48, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
- It was you that talked of two sides in the first place (Armenian and Turkish). Even if this image is a faked image, it still has historical value, as it was publish in 1919 right after or even during the Armenian Genocide. If it is a fake, as this blog and news article imply, them it shows that are those in the "armenian" side that will use any image without much ado to historical accuracy and provenance about the historical sources. If its really what the images states an "Ottoman\[Turk] official teasing Armenian starved children by showing bread\[pita]" than it shows the cruelty of the sistematic ethnic expulsions\cleansing and massacres that occurred in this genocide and the attempts on the "turk" side to downplay or even deny all the events between 1915-1918/1923. Tm (talk) 00:27, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- There's no "if", there's a consensus on both sides that it is fake, and that is the only reason why I mentioned sides. And you don't even have to be an expert to see that it is a primitive fabrication. In fact, this image is so grotesque, I'm surprised that anyone could have believed in its authenticity. Just look at the incredible length of the arm of the squatted figure on the right. Or the lack on an arm and a leg of the "Turkish official". How could he stand and not fall over? And his arm with a bread in it is clearly taken from another picture and badly attached to his body, it does not fit right. And I'm leaving aside the fact that an Ottoman official would not dress in a European attire. However as I said, I cannot see a single instance of this image's usage to illustrate a forgery, therefore the argument that the image is used to demonstrate that one or both sides are not so discriminate in using their sources is not valid. Grandmaster 07:47, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- It was you that talked of two sides in the first place (Armenian and Turkish). Even if this image is a faked image, it still has historical value, as it was publish in 1919 right after or even during the Armenian Genocide. If it is a fake, as this blog and news article imply, them it shows that are those in the "armenian" side that will use any image without much ado to historical accuracy and provenance about the historical sources. If its really what the images states an "Ottoman\[Turk] official teasing Armenian starved children by showing bread\[pita]" than it shows the cruelty of the sistematic ethnic expulsions\cleansing and massacres that occurred in this genocide and the attempts on the "turk" side to downplay or even deny all the events between 1915-1918/1923. Tm (talk) 00:27, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- I don't really understand your point about "both sides". What does this one has to do with both sides? We are discussing a particular fake image, a collage, made very primitively out of fragments of several images. That it is a fake is quite clear, there could be no reasonable doubt about it, and both sides agree that it is fake. The question here is, what is the practical use of this picture in Wikipedia articles? So far I can only see that a proven forgery is presented in some articles as a true image, and that is not what Wikipedia stands for. I would understand if the image was used as an illustration in an article about image manipulation, but I don't see that happening. --Grandmaster 22:48, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
- Keep - there are no real new arguemts. I don't see, why we need to discuss this every 2, 3 years. Marcus Cyron (talk) 01:16, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Delete I don't see why you wish to keep a falsification in Commons, where you are an admin. You should explain us your reasons, personal or not, and not those who wish to delete a forgery. --E4024 (talk) 07:14, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Indeed, what is your argument for having a proven forgery here, other than the fact that it was discussed 4 years ago? Consensus may change, according to wiki rules, and I want to understand what purpose does this fake image serve here. So far no convincing argument for maintaining the image has been provided. --Grandmaster 07:47, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Delete I personally find it ridiculous to promote a clearly fake image (with academic sources attesting hereto), agreeing with that fact that it is a forgery, but justifying its use by saying "it has been around long enough so it should continue to be used". In my opinion, it definitely should not. This is not in line with what Wikipedia is all about. Parishan (talk) 08:50, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Comment It should also be noted that the image being fake is also admitted by the Oxford University Press, which published the image in 2005 and 2007 editions of the book by Donald Bloxham "The Great Game of Genocide. Imperialism, Nationalism and the Destruction of the Ottoman Armenians". When the image forgery was reported to them, the existing stock of the book had been destroyed but the photograph had been retained in a new printing with the following caption:
'This photograph purports to be an Ottoman [sic.] official taunting starving Armenians with bread. It is a fake, combining elements of two (or more) separate photographs: a demonstration were one needed of the propaganda stakes on both sides of the genocide issue with evidence of all sorts manipulated for latterday political purposes. The photograph was also included when the book was first published but then was believed to be genuine. It had previously been used in Gérard Chaliand and Yves Ternon's Le Genocide des Arméniens (1980), which shows that prior use is no substitute for rigorous investigation of a picture's provenance – and in the absence of clear provenance, for a minutely detailed examination of the picture itself. It is a cautionary tale for historians, many of whom are better trained in testing and using written sources than in evaluating photographic evidence. The publishers and author are grateful to have had the forgery drawn to their attention'.
I believe if we are to keep the image, the image description should be changed along the lines of the Oxford University Press, to inform the reader that the image is fake. Grandmaster 09:00, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Grandmaster, would you mind removing one of the three asterix signs from your talk just beneath my previous one? It looks like you are replying me when you're not. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 09:04, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Fixed that. Sorry. --Grandmaster 14:04, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Keep I changed the description following Grandmaster's proposal. Yann (talk) 09:20, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Keep Whether it's a fake or not, the picture is clearly of historical interest. In any case it's in use on two Wikipedias, which means it's deemed in scope. If you don't like the description, then correct it. --bjh21 (talk) 11:45, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Comment Do you think it was used appropriately on those 2 Wikis? I see no disclaimer there that the image is fake. --Grandmaster 14:08, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Comment To the closing administrator, please take into account that of the three deletion votes, one is of a turk user blocked indefinitely in the EN Wikipedia for shenanigans with this image and other armenia related subjects, one azeri and other probable azeri. Usually language and nationality should be indiferent on DR but with this subject and others related with armenians, azeris and turks, each side shows how ugly their relation can be. Tm (talk) 12:22, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- So you propose to discount the votes on the basis of nationality, and not on the merits of actual arguments? Somehow the nationalities of those who voted keep on previous AFD did not matter. I'm sure the closing admin will look into actual facts and sources, presented here, and not ethnic or national identities. However, I would really appreciate a broader discussion on this picture, with involvement of people who have no relations or previous involvement in the region related articles. Grandmaster 14:04, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Keep but Rename so the name includes "fake" or "forged" or the equivalent. It's a historically significant forgery, so we should keep it, but we should do what we can to make sure that it is not used except as a forgery. --GRuban (talk) 17:55, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- Agreed about renaming. Yann (talk) 20:57, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- I am only d'accord with eliminating all forgeries from Commons but I have a word to those who lose time on naming: "Turk official" (sic, noun instead of adjective) and of course not Ottoman! (If an Ottoman Armenian does something good he is Armenian, if he does anything bad, he is Ottoman... :-) Well, I never asked a rename/move because using forgeries is a shame and this is a question of principles. OTOH, please show me another "Turk official" or "Ottoman official" in 1915 (?!?) dressed like my brother in high-school! (Especially the necktie, was quite fashionable back then; no, I'm referring to late 20th Century, not the beginnings of it. :) I appreciate that the Ottoman civil servant is all dressed up and well-shaven/combed ("groomed"?) during the war!!! And strangely enough he is not taken to serve at the military while 16 year old boys were dying in Gallipoli at the very same days! Now a suspicion entered my mind: I guess this gentleman could be an Ottoman Armenian, because most of them escaped military service while their country (the Ottoman Empire) was in a war of survival... --E4024 (talk) 07:01, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
- If the result will be keep, I agree that the file name (along with description) should be changed accordingly to reflect that the image is fake. --Grandmaster 08:31, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
- I am only d'accord with eliminating all forgeries from Commons but I have a word to those who lose time on naming: "Turk official" (sic, noun instead of adjective) and of course not Ottoman! (If an Ottoman Armenian does something good he is Armenian, if he does anything bad, he is Ottoman... :-) Well, I never asked a rename/move because using forgeries is a shame and this is a question of principles. OTOH, please show me another "Turk official" or "Ottoman official" in 1915 (?!?) dressed like my brother in high-school! (Especially the necktie, was quite fashionable back then; no, I'm referring to late 20th Century, not the beginnings of it. :) I appreciate that the Ottoman civil servant is all dressed up and well-shaven/combed ("groomed"?) during the war!!! And strangely enough he is not taken to serve at the military while 16 year old boys were dying in Gallipoli at the very same days! Now a suspicion entered my mind: I guess this gentleman could be an Ottoman Armenian, because most of them escaped military service while their country (the Ottoman Empire) was in a war of survival... --E4024 (talk) 07:01, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
- Agreed about renaming. Yann (talk) 20:57, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
Kept: you can use {{Rename}} to rename the file (please find a consensus in the talk page first). Ruthven (msg) 13:54, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 77.164.22.132 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://www.wapenschilder.nl/expertise INeverCry 22:27, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
- So is {{PD-NL-gemeentewapen}} not valid? Relevant discussion: Template talk:PD-NL-gemeentewapen. -Ryūkotsusei (talk) 17:11, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
- It seems that this coat of arms was the base on which Katepanomegas' now deleted Dutch heraldry was based. This is quite clear, I'm afraid. Lemmens, Tom (talk) 08:58, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 01:47, 9 April 2013 (UTC)