Commons:Deletion requests/2009/07/14

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

Contents 1 July 14 1.1 File:BY_Vitebsk_square_of_eternal_flare.jpg 1.2 File:Aquamacs_screenshot.png 1.3 File:Shishkov_-_Novodevichiy.jpg 1.4 File:Bubba_Gump.JPG 1.5 File:Hauptwerk_Virtual_Organ_(schematic).jpg 1.6 File:Ubuntudust.jpg 1.7 File:Warsaw_Symphony_Orchestra.jpg 1.8 File:Old_greek_biometric_passport.jpg

[edit] July 14

[edit] File:BY_Vitebsk_square_of_eternal_flare.jpg

No Commons:Freedom of panorama in Belarus. Monument installed in 1974. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:24, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Aquamacs_screenshot.png

Non free software screenshot. Or maybe the OS features are considered as de minimis ? Dereckson (talk) 16:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Mac OS X is obviously not free. But the OS features here are very de minimis. 87.231.105.237 11:01, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

And the background wallpaper, de minimis too? --Dereckson (talk) 08:56, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Shishkov_-_Novodevichiy.jpg

Essential source information is missing High Contrast (talk) 16:59, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

 Keep 1874. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 15:16, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Bubba_Gump.JPG

Image focuses on a presumably copyrighted logo. De minimis doesn't apply due to the centrality of the non-free content. Powers (talk) 18:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

•  Comment I added a {{trademark}} notice. Infrogmation (talk) 01:12, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Hauptwerk_Virtual_Organ_(schematic).jpg

Collage of a number of images of unknown photographers. Claims to be a version of suspect file File:Hauptwerk-schematic.jpg. Sv1xv (talk) 19:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

All your request lack evidences. You must provides the evidens for your claims.

BTW: It is an easy thing to replace all images with GPL/CC version.

And your client can never achieve the vandalism. --Shoulder-synth (talk) 19:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• Delete. This question is legitim. It's to the uploader to provide elements demonstrating the schema use free images, giving the pictures sources. --Dereckson (talk) 19:45, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• Not delete. This request ignores the fact that the author of original image File:Hauptwerk-schematic.jpg said images in the picture are all his own work (he photographed his own organ). --Shoulder-synth (talk) 19:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

• Speedy delete This image is an exact duplicate of a file already nominated. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hauptwerk-schematic.jpg‎ I have provided links over there that prove this file is a derivative of copyrighted software screenshots. Also, this image was uploaded by a user who is impersonating me. Jaksmata (talk) 20:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Jaksmata, Your old request claimed

The image was taken from here. The software depicted in the diagram, as well as the image of the organ are copyrighted by Milan Digital Audio LLC (a.k.a Hauptwerk).

The software image was already replaced, and your point out was already cleared.

Your claims are inconsistent. --Shoulder-synth (talk) 20:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you don't seem to understand the licensing issues at hand. Look at Commons:Licensing and Commons:Screenshots. If you take somebody else's work and modify it, that does not make it your work. The picture of the organ console included here is actually three photographs spliced together, copyrighted by Hauptwerk, and included in their software. You can't edit the picture and then claim that it is entirely your work - Hauptwerk is still the copyright holder of the photographs even though they were changed a bit.

I misspoke earlier when I said that "this is an exact duplicate" - upon closer examination, I see that it has been modified, however, this is still copyrighted by someone other than the person who uploaded it.

Even if this picture is corrected, I'm still going to vote to have it deleted because the uploader clearly is trying to impersonate me and confuse others with a deliberately similar user name. Jaksmata (talk) 20:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The story of Jaksmata seemed to be the product of his imaginations. I zoomed up the console image and checked it. Keyboard and pedals seem to be same as photographs on left side, and rest seemed to be drawing or computer generated images. Some GPL software for GNU/Linux has similar interfaces, and Hauptwerk may be derived from these. --114.164.5.107 21:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Ubuntudust.jpg

No source for backgound picture. Are Firefox icon and Google page screenshot de minimis, especially when they could easily be replaced by free items? Dereckson (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Warsaw_Symphony_Orchestra.jpg

It looks like copyright violation because the picture is evidently old and the source given is "plakat" (advertising). Andrei Romanenko (talk) 20:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Old_greek_biometric_passport.jpg

Not PD-ineligible. Both the photograph and the passport design itself may be eligible for copyright protection. —LX (talk, contribs) 21:30, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Keep. It is a design common all over the EU, and I believe same regulations as EU money applies to passport covers too. Moreover, we cannot identify the person that owns it.--The daydreamer (talk) 23:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

So the appropriate copyright tag for the passport is... {{PD-EU-I-believe}}? And the photo? I don't know why you mention that we can't identify the person who owns the passport, since I didn't mention anything related to that as a reason for deletion. —LX (talk, contribs) 05:48, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

 Keep This is part of an administrative document issued by the Government and, therefore, one of the rare cases where {{PD-GreekGov}} applies. Sv1xv (talk) 09:28, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

 Keep - no creative work on it... just the coat of arms and words written with a very (VERY) common font. This is a clear exageration of copyright policies. In Italian we use to say about this kind of behaviour: "essere più realista del re". Dantadd✉ 03:05, 21 August 2009 (UTC)